Adds the ability to cherry pick a commit via the API. Right now it only supports to directly cherry pick a commit and not starting a MR from it. Shall we do that also for the API?

Closes #25450

See merge request !8047

For single line Git commit messages, the close quote should be on the same line as the open quote

_Originally opened at !7299 by @jzinn._

- - -

## What does this MR do?

Chomps merge commit messages so that there is not a dangling close quote.

A better solution would be not to use quotes at all, but to set off the message in a `<div>` with a background color.

## Screenshots (if relevant)

![Screen_Shot_2016-11-04_at_8.06.54_PM](/uploads/6e749c5227d88a9bfea64e70cccaf14a/Screen_Shot_2016-11-04_at_8.06.54_PM.png)

See merge request !7975

API: Memoize the current_user so that the sudo can work properly

Closes #25482

See merge request !8017

Replace the Spinach specs for admin settings with RSpec feature specs as per #23036 

Part of #23036

See merge request !8058

API: Ability to get group's project in simple representation

Closes https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/25412

See merge request !8060

Add index to routes table on lower path for postgresql

Improve performance of https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/7121 

See merge request !8041

Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

Allow all alphanumeric characters in file names

## What does this MR do?

Allow more characters in file names such as Chinese symbols.

## Why was this MR needed?

It is annoying that some files which can be uploaded using Git CLI cannot be created with the web editor.

## What are the relevant issue numbers?

fixes #20190

See merge request !8002

added border-radius and padding to labels

## What does this MR do?

It creates a pill like style for labels.

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?
-

## Why was this MR needed?
get a unique label look/style


## Screenshots (if relevant)
![image](/uploads/2cf347984ae4e36cd061c5a761ee99c9/image.png)
![image](/uploads/c23bbeba4b2525b4f36dac5a0fa1037c/image.png)


## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added
- [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [ ] API support added
- Tests
  - [ ] Added for this feature/bug
  - [ ] All builds are passing
- [ ] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- [ ] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides)
- [ ] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if it does - rebase it please)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

## What are the relevant issue numbers?


Closes #25518

See merge request !8054

Minor improvements to nested groups code

See merge request !8011

Signed-off-by: Dmitriy Zaporozhets <dmitriy.zaporozhets@gmail.com>

Signed-off-by: Rémy Coutable <remy@rymai.me>

Copy commit hash to clipboard

Closes #3478 

See merge request !8020

Merge branch '24949-view-2-up-swipe-onion-skin-controls-for-merge-request-diff-containing-an-image' into 'master'

Add image controls to MR diffs

## What does this MR do?

Instantiates `ImageFile` in `Diff` which is instantiated in `MergeRequestTabs`.

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?

## Why was this MR needed?

## Screenshots (if relevant)

![Screen_Shot_2016-12-04_at_11.11.21](/uploads/738c68ad3fa682c1c132421abce7165e/Screen_Shot_2016-12-04_at_11.11.21.png)

## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added
- [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [ ] API support added
- Tests
  - [ ] Added for this feature/bug
  - [ ] All builds are passing
- [ ] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- [ ] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides)
- [ ] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if it does - rebase it please)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

## What are the relevant issue numbers?


Closes #24949

See merge request !7919

Allow to delete tag release note

closes #13270

See merge request !8001

Don't allow blank MR titles in API

Closes #25033

See merge request !7848

Don't require `API::API` in routes

Closes #18312.

See merge request !8045

Replace static fixture for awards_handler_spec

## What does this MR do?

Use the already existing dynamic fixture `issues/open-issue.html` (!6059) in `awards_handler_spec.js` instead of the static fixture `awards_handler.html.haml`.

## What are the relevant issue numbers?

#24753

See merge request !7661

Fix Crontab typo for PruneOldEventsWorker to run 4x/day instead of 60x/hour

In c0a92cb8 the intended cron setting (per the comment) was to be "4 times a day", a * instead of a 0 means it runs 60x/hr 4x/day.

Closes #25571

See merge request !8051

Fixed lint warning and propose fail or warning

## What does this MR do?

1. Fixes a linter warning that is currently on `master`.

2. Proposes the use of `--max-warnings 0` with `eslint` to make sure the CI build fails on any warnings.

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?

## Why was this MR needed?

## Screenshots (if relevant)

## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added
- [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [ ] API support added
- Tests
  - [ ] Added for this feature/bug
  - [ ] All builds are passing
- [ ] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- [ ] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides)
- [ ] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if it does - rebase it please)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

## What are the relevant issue numbers?

See merge request !8025

break comment "edited at" block out of the note-text element to prevent issues w…

## What does this MR do?

Moves "edited" text below a note into its own element apart from rendered markdown to prevent issues when it is preceded by an inline text node.

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?

to reproduce the bug, add text immediately following an image in a note's markdown like so:

```markdown
![foo](/uploads/c6f86574e5c3b5b73e91eeccbcb06fe6/foo.png) test text here
```

then edit and save the note.


## Why was this MR needed?

## Screenshots (if relevant)

Before:  
![Screen_Shot_2016-12-12_at_1.01.59_PM_copy](/uploads/c6f86574e5c3b5b73e91eeccbcb06fe6/Screen_Shot_2016-12-12_at_1.01.59_PM_copy.png)

After:  
![Screen_Shot_2016-12-12_at_1.00.47_PM_copy](/uploads/7a6d86d1c415114b05b4c7b662f97e93/Screen_Shot_2016-12-12_at_1.00.47_PM_copy.png)

## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [ ] ~~[Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added~~
- [ ] ~~[Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)~~
- [ ] ~~API support added~~
- Tests
  - [ ] ~~Added for this feature/bug~~
  - [ ] 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?

Closes #25155

See merge request !8048

Correct autocomplete for values with special characters

## What does this MR do?

This adds a check for any special chars in any value passed to the `DefaultOptions.beforeInsert` callback function. If special chars are found and `skipSpecialCharTest` option is `false`, it will wrap the value in quotation marks.

This fixed autocompleting `~customer+` instead of `~"customer+"`.

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?

## Why was this MR needed?

## Screenshots (if relevant)

![2016-12-03_10.37.11](/uploads/59159623638939933d23b447692775b8/2016-12-03_10.37.11.gif)

## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added
- [ ] [Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)
- [ ] API support added
- Tests
  - [ ] Added for this feature/bug
  - [ ] All builds are passing
- [ ] Conform by the [merge request performance guides](http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/merge_request_performance_guidelines.html)
- [ ] Conform by the [style guides](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#style-guides)
- [ ] Branch has no merge conflicts with `master` (if it does - rebase it please)
- [ ] [Squashed related commits together](https://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Rewriting-History#Squashing-Commits)

## What are the relevant issue numbers?


Closes #25286, #24961

See merge request !7910

Resolve "contributor emails in contributors graphs is case sensitive"

## What does this MR do?

changes author email to a case insensitive comparison so emails like "Somebody@foo.com" and "somebody@foo.com" are treated as a single author in contribution graphs.

## Are there points in the code the reviewer needs to double check?

should be pretty simple

## Why was this MR needed?

see above description

## Screenshots (if relevant)

#### before:
![before](/uploads/873a073e8d31e1094da6f050ba3e3f51/before.png)

#### after:
![after](/uploads/b9e534755615994f3e58442141c17f86/after.png)


## Does this MR meet the acceptance criteria?

- [ ] [Changelog entry](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/development/changelog.html) added
- [ ] ~~[Documentation created/updated](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/development/doc_styleguide.md)~~
- [ ] ~~API support added~~
- Tests
  - [ ] ~~Added for this feature/bug~~
  - [ ] ~~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?

Closes #19550

See merge request !8021

break comment "edited at" block out of the note-text element to prevent issues with inline text nodes