We need to rebuild the binary whenever the plugin has changed.
Previously we were not doing this if the binary already existed. This MR
adds an override parameter to the build() function which will force a
rebuild even if the binary already exists.
The README has been updated to note that this parameter should be used
for Packer/Lazy, and when someone is troubleshooting. It won't be passed
in to the build function during the normal setup call.
Should address #55
This MR adds the `.pipeline()` command which opens up the pipeline popup. This popup shows information about the current pipeline and it's jobs, and gives users the ability to re-trigger failed jobs.
Previously, the merge function would override the entire default table during a
merge if a matching table was found in the override table.
This would prevent users from modifying a single setting (for instance changing
just a single icon, rather than the whole thing)
BREAKING CHANGE: This MR addresses an underlying issue with the original implementation in regards to detecting line numbers for comments.
As such, this is a major breaking change. The setup function signature has changed, please review the `README.md` for the new arguments. The delta pager has also been added as a dependency: https://github.com/dandavison/delta
There will be future work to implement a native solution for parsing changes and line numbers.
This MR simplifies the plugin quite a bit by only attempting to start the Go server after you specifically try to run a command. This streamlines working on feature branches and removes the need for a `base_branch` property entirely.
Adds APIs for the ability to add or remove reviewers and assignees to a merge request. The eligible reviewers and assignees are pulled from the current members of a project.
We weren't writing a 200 status code post-delete because Gitlab returns
a 204 (empty but successful) by default. I updated this logic to change
that and also to refresh the tree.
The collapsed state of the tree will be wiped out if you delete a
bottom-level discussion but that's okay for now, not a high priority
right now.
We want to pick the note ID more carefully for deletion.
If it's the root node (aka the first comment in a discussion thread) then
we want to choose the root_note_id since that is the ID of the first
comment in the discussion. Otherwise, we want to choose the note_node
ID.
