Conflicts:
- `spec/system/settings/preferences/appearance_spec.rb`:
Upstream tests for changing themes in there, but glitch-soc has
its own place for that.
Updated upstream's change while skipping the theme test.
Conflicts:
- `app/models/concerns/user/has_settings.rb`:
Not a real conflict, upstream added a setting textually close to a glitch-soc one.
Added upstream's new setting.
- `app/views/settings/preferences/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Not a real conflict, upstream added a setting textually close to a glitch-soc one.
Added upstream's new setting.
- `config/routes.rb`:
Upstream moved web app routes to `config/routes/web_app.rb`, while glitch-soc had
an extra route.
Moved the extra route to `config/routes/web_app.rb`.
- `spec/controllers/settings/preferences/appearance_controller_spec.rb`:
This spec got converted to a system spec upstream.
However, the theme setting works differently in glitch-soc, so the spec had been
changed.
Changed the corresponding system spec as well.
Conflicts:
- `app/javascript/material-icons/400-24px/chat.svg`:
Glitch-soc used this one but not upstream.
Upstream pulled a presumably more up-to-date version of the file.
Switched to upstream's version.
- `app/views/layouts/application.html.haml`:
Upstream removed use of font-awesome.
I hope we are ready.
- `app/views/layouts/embedded.html.haml`:
Upstream removed use of font-awesome.
I hope we are ready.
- `app/views/layouts/error.html.haml`:
Upstream removed use of font-awesome.
I hope we are ready.
Conflicts:
- `app/helpers/application_helper.rb`:
Not a real conflict, just upstream adding a method textually adjacent to
glitch-soc only code.
Ported upstream's change.
Packs are now loaded from views, just like upstream, and are
identified by their filenames. The definition of `theme.yml` has
changed as such:
- `pack_directory` is now required
- `pack` is now unused
- `signed_in_preload` has been introduced
Conflicts:
- `config/routes/api.rb`:
glitch-soc has an extra `:destroy` action on notifications for historical reasons.
Kept it for now, while otherwise updating as upstream did.
Conflicts:
- `app/views/settings/preferences/appearance/show.html.haml`:
Conflict because of a code style fix, while some changed lines are
absent from glitch-soc.
Ignored the deleted lines.
Conflicts:
- `README.md`:
Upstream has updated its README, we have a completely different one.
Kept ours.
- `app/views/auth/sessions/two_factor.html.haml`:
Upstream refactored stuff and the conflict is because of glitch-soc's theming
system.
Ported upstream changes while accounting for the different theming system.
Conflicts:
- `config/environments/production.rb`:
Upstream enforced a code style change and glitch-soc had a few different lines.
Applied upstream's code style to glitch-soc's changes.
Conflicts:
- `.github/workflows/build-image.yml`:
Upstream entirely refactored this, while we changed the docker repository
to upload to and disabled the “latest” tag.
Applied the repository change to `.github/workflows/build-*.yml`, as well
as disabling native ARMv64 builds.
- `README.md`:
We have a completely different README.
Kept ours.
- `app/views/admin/settings/shared/_links.html.haml`:
Upstream refactored, we had an extra item.
Refactored as upstream did.
- `spec/controllers/api/v1/timelines/public_controller_spec.rb`:
Upstream deleted this file, to be replaced by a request spec at
`spec/requests/api/v1/timelines/public_spec.rb`.
We had an extra bit about enabling the public timelines because we have
different defaults than upstream.
Moved that bit to `spec/requests/api/v1/timelines/public_spec.rb`
