Conflicts:
- `config/initializers/content_security_policy.rb`:
Upstream added some code to add the Identity Provider's sign-in endpoint to
the `form-action` Content Security Policy directive but our version of the
file is pretty different.
Ported the change.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-releases.yml`:
Upstream changed comments close to a line we modified to account for
different container image repositories.
Updated the comments as upstream did.
Conflicts:
- `Vagrantfile`:
Upstream bumped a bunch of values, including one that was already bumped by
glitch-soc.
Took upstream's version.
- `lib/paperclip/transcoder.rb`:
glitch-soc already had a partial fix for this.
Took upstream's version.
Conflicts:
- `.rubocop_todo.yml`:
Upstream regenerated this file, glitch-soc had a specific ignore.
- `README.md`:
Upstream updated its README, but glitch-soc has a completely different one.
Kept glitch-soc's README
Conflicts:
- `app/controllers/authorize_interactions_controller.rb`:
Small conflict due to our theming system.
- `streaming/index.js`:
Upstream refactored part of the streaming server.
We had some extra logic for handling local-only posts.
Applied the refactor.
Conflicts:
- `db/schema.rb`:
Upstream regenerated the schema file using Rails 7, the conflicts are
caused by our extra columns.
Applied upstream's changes, but keeping our extra columns.
Conflicts:
- `app/models/account.rb`:
Upstream added new validations close to lines on which glitch-soc had
modified validations to handle custom limits set through environment
variables.
Ported upstream changes.
- `config/initializers/content_security_policy.rb`:
Upstream added `AZURE_ALIAS_HOST`. Glitch-soc's version of the file is
completely different.
Added `AZURE_ALIAS_HOST` to our version of the file.
Conflicts:
- app/controllers/application_controller.rb:
Upstream added an `include` where we had an extra `include` due to
glitch-soc's theming system.
Added upstream's new `include`.
Conflicts:
- `app/serializers/initial_state_serializer.rb`:
Upstream renamed an initial state parameter, where we had extra ones.
Renamed as upstream did.
- `app/workers/feed_insert_worker.rb`:
Upstream wrapped database query in a block, we had extra database
queries because of the DM timeline.
Moved everything in the block.
Conflicts:
- `package.json`:
Upstream changed various script definitions in lines surrounding the one for
`i18n:extract`, which had glitch-soc-specific changes.
Updated the scripts as upstream did, while keeping our changes to
`i18n:extract`.
Conflicts:
- `app/controllers/auth/setup_controller.rb`:
Upstream removed a method close to a glitch-soc theming-related method.
Removed the method like upstream did.
* Run rubocop --autocorrect on app/, config/ and lib/, also manually fix some remaining style issues
* Run rubocop --autocorrect-all on db/
* Run rubocop --autocorrect-all on `spec/` and fix remaining issues
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream added a link to the roadmap, but we have a completely different README.
Kept ours.
- `app/models/media_attachment.rb`:
Upstream upped media attachment limits.
Updated the default according to upstream's.
- `db/migrate/20180831171112_create_bookmarks.rb`:
Upstream changed the migration compatibility level.
Did so too.
- `config/initializers/content_security_policy.rb`:
Upstream refactored this file but we have a different version.
Kept our version.
- `app/controllers/settings/preferences_controller.rb`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
The file does not directly references individual settings anymore.
Applied upstream changes.
- `app/lib/user_settings_decorator.rb`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
The file got removed entirely.
Removed it as well.
- `app/models/user.rb`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
References to individual settings have been removed from the file.
Removed them as well.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
Applied upstream's changes and ported ours back.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/notifications/show.html.haml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
Applied upstream's changes and ported ours back.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/other/show.html.haml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
Applied upstream's changes and ported ours back.
- `config/settings.yml`:
Upstream completely refactored user settings storage, and glitch-soc has a
different set of settings.
In particular, upstream removed user-specific and unused settings.
Did the same in glitch-soc.
- `spec/controllers/application_controller_spec.rb`:
Conflicts due to glitch-soc's theming system.
Mostly kept our version, as upstream messed up the tests.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream changed their README, we have our own.
Kept ours.
- `app/helpers/application_helper.rb`:
Minor code style fix upstream, on a line that is different in glitch-soc
due to the different theming system.
Applied the code style fix to our own code.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Code style fix on a line next to lines exclusive to glitch-soc.
Applied upstream changes.
- `yarn.lock`:
Upstream updated a dependency textually close to a glitch-soc-only
dependency.
Updated the dependency like upstream did.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream README has been changed, but we have a completely different one.
Kept our `README.md`.
- `lib/sanitize_ext/sanitize_config.rb`:
Upstream added support for more incoming HTML tags (a large subset of what
glitch-soc accepts).
Change the code style to match upstream's but otherwise do not change our
code.
- `spec/lib/sanitize_config_spec.rb`:
Upstream added support for more incoming HTML tags (a large subset of what
glitch-soc accepts).
Kept our version, since the tests are mostly glitch-soc's, except for cases
which are purposefuly different.
Conflicts:
- `.prettierignore`:
Upstream added a line at the end of the file, while glitch-soc had its own
extra lines.
Took upstream's change.
- `CONTRIBUTING.md`:
We have our custom CONTRIBUTING.md quoting upstream. Upstream made changes.
Ported upstream changes.
- `app/controllers/application_controller.rb`:
Upstream made code style changes in a method that is entirely replaced
in glitch-soc.
Ignored the change.
- `app/models/account.rb`:
Code style changes textually close to glitch-soc-specific changes.
Ported upstream changes.
- `lib/sanitize_ext/sanitize_config.rb`:
Upstream code style changes.
Ignored them.
Conflicts:
- `.github/dependabot.yml`:
Upstream made changes while we have dropped this file.
Keep the file deleted.
- `.prettierignore`:
Upstream made changes at the end of the file, where we
had our extra lines.
Just moved our extra lines back at the end.
- `app/serializers/initial_state_serializer.rb`:
Upstream code style changes.
Applied them.
- `app/services/backup_service.rb`:
Upstream code style changes.
Applied them.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Minor upstream change, our README is completely different.
Kept ours.
- `lib/tasks/assets.rake`:
glitch-soc has extra code to deal with its theming system,
upstream changed a line that exists in glitch-soc.
Applied upstream changes.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream updated `docker/build-push-action`, and we a different config
for `docker/metadata-action` so the lines directly above were different,
but it's not a real conflict.
Upgraded `docker/build-push-action` as upstream did.
- `app/javascript/mastodon/features/compose/components/compose_form.js`:
Upstream changed the codestyle near a line we had modified to accommodate
configurable character count.
Kept our change.
Akkoma and possibly others expect the `tag` field
in an EmojiReact activity to be an array, not just
a single object, so it's being wrapped into one
now. I'm not entirely sure whether this is the
idiomatic way of doing it tbh, but it works fine.
Using an emoji map was completely unnecessary in
the first place, because the reaction list from
the API response includes URLs for every custom
emoji anyway. The reaction list now also contains
a boolean field indicating whether it is an
external custom emoji, which is required because
people should only be able to react with Unicode
emojis and local custom ones, not with custom
emojis from other servers.
