Support configurable attachment size in Application Settings page
### What does this MR do?
This MR provides the ability to configure the maximum size of an attachment inside a note. A parameter has been added to the Application Settings page.
### Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
What should be done with the legacy note attachment validation? I added code to make the validation work with the configurable setting. I could see an issue where an admin lowers the limit from 10 megabytes to 5 megabytes, which could cause an existing model to be invalid.
### Why was this MR needed?
We often have attachments that exceed 10 MB, and it would be nice to be able to override the defaults.
### What are the relevant issue numbers / [Feature requests](http://feedback.gitlab.com/)?
See Issue #1258
### Screenshots
Before:
After:
See merge request !407
Fix cross-references that contain underscores
### What does this MR do?
Cross-references that contain underscores confuse the Markdown renderer and don't work properly. For example:
1. In `myacct/project_one#456`, add a comment that includes a reference to `myacct/project_two#123`.
2. The comment in `myacct/project_one#456` links correctly.
3. The system note in `myacct/project_two#123` is incorrectly linked as:
`mentioned in issue myacct/projectone#456_`
This MR removes the use of the `_` character in the system notes to prevent Markdown confusion.
See a full discussion in #1160.
### Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
To preserve backwards compatibility with existing system notes, there is a SQL wildcard match for notes having underscores. This seemed safer than migrating all notes.
### Why was this MR needed?
In an ideal world, the Markdown parser would be able to handle references containing underscores with or without escape sequences. However, there are a number of issues:
1. RedCarpet's parser for emphasis block is pretty dumb: it treats `#` as a word break and thus even the `intra_word_emphasis` flag has no effect.
2. The parser is in C and can't be changed easily.
3. There is no way to insert an escape sequence for emphasis blocks.
The only way around this is to switch to something like CommonMark, which does support escape sequences.
### What are the relevant issue numbers / [Feature requests](http://feedback.gitlab.com/)?
Issue #1160
### Screenshots
Before:
After:
See merge request !385
Restricted visibility levels - bug fix and new feature
This allows admin users to override restricted visibility settings when creating and updating projects and snippets, and moves the restricted visibility configuration from gitlab.yml to the web UI. See #1903.
## Move configuration location
I added a new section to the application settings page for restricted visibility levels. Each level has a checkbox, styled with Bootstrap to look like a toggle button. A checked box means that the level is restricted. I added a glowing text shadow and changed the background color for checked buttons because the default styles made it hard to distinguish between checked and unchecked. This image shows the new section with the "Public" box checked:
## Allow admins to override
To allow admin users to override the restricted visibility levels, I had to remove the `visibility_level` validation from the `Project` class. The model doesn't know about the `current_user`, which should determine whether the restrictions can be overridden. We could use the creator in the validation, but that wouldn't work correctly for projects where a non-admin user is the creator and an admin tries to change the project to a restricted visibility level.
The `Project::UpdateService` and `Project::CreateService` classes already had code to determine whether the current user is allowed to use a given visibility level; now all visibility level validation is done in those classes. Currently, when a non-admin tries to create or update a project using a restricted level, these classes silently set the visibility level to the global default (create) or the project's existing value (update). I changed this behavior to be more like an Active Model validation, where using a restricted level causes the entire request to be rejected.
Project and personal snippets didn't have service classes, and restricted visibility levels weren't being enforced in the model or the controllers. The UI disabled radio buttons for restricted levels, but that wouldn't be difficult to circumvent. I created the `CreateSnippetService` and `UpdateSnippetService` classes to do the same restricted visibility check that the project classes do. And since I was dealing with snippet visibility levels, I updated the API endpoints for project snippets to allow users to set and update the visibility level.
## TODO
* [x] Add more tests for restricted visibility functionality
cc @sytse @dzaporozhets
See merge request !1655
Valery Sizov
Dmitriy Zaporozhets
bugagazavr
Douwe Maan
Dmitriy Zaporozhets
Stan Hu
Kamil Trzcinski
Hannes Rosenögger
