Name |
Last commit
|
Last update |
---|---|---|
.. | ||
assets | ||
controllers | ||
finders | ||
helpers | ||
mailers | ||
models | ||
policies | ||
serializers | ||
services | ||
uploaders | ||
validators | ||
views | ||
workers |
BigW Consortium Gitlab
move timeago.js to vendor directory ## What does this MR do? moves timeago.js into `/vendor/assets/javascripts` for consistency with other external javascript libraries. ## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check? make sure timeago still works as it should...? I don't see how this could have broken anything. ## Why was this MR needed? consistency with our guidelines ## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria? - Tests - [x] All builds are passing - [x] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html) - [x] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides) - [x] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if it does - rebase it please) - [x] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits) ## What are the relevant issue numbers? See discussion in [!6274](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/6274#note_18625583) See merge request !7590
Name |
Last commit
|
Last update |
---|---|---|
.. | ||
assets | Loading commit data... | |
controllers | Loading commit data... | |
finders | Loading commit data... | |
helpers | Loading commit data... | |
mailers | Loading commit data... | |
models | Loading commit data... | |
policies | Loading commit data... | |
serializers | Loading commit data... | |
services | Loading commit data... | |
uploaders | Loading commit data... | |
validators | Loading commit data... | |
views | Loading commit data... | |
workers | Loading commit data... |