Thanks for this PR!

I left a few comments, but overall it is looking great 👍

Codecov Report

Merging #1484 (2935e62) into master (fbbc0d4) will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1484      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.98%   91.00%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          73       73              
  Lines        4080     4091      +11     
==========================================
+ Hits         3712     3723      +11     
  Misses        368      368              

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Would it be possible for you to add some unit tests as well for this?

Would it be possible for you to add some unit tests as well for this?

There are no unit tests for project wikis. Not sure it makes sense to have unit tests for groups only. Could think about adding functional tests. Makes sense?

Would it be possible for you to add some unit tests as well for this?

There are no unit tests for project wikis. Not sure it makes sense to have unit tests for groups only. Could think about adding functional tests. Makes sense?

I just triggered the workflow. Group Wikis are a Premium/EE feature so let's see if this works in the CE container 😁 And you're right, we'd need to create a new test_wikis.py module with a group wiki mock response for this. There are examples in other modules if the functional tests fail (if it fails, maybe add @pytest.mark.skip to the functional test that you added, for now).

Edit: it failed (gitlab.exceptions.GitlabCreateError: 404: 404 Not Found), so maybe add a skip marker and if you need any help with unit tests let us know :)

FYI: Running tox -e black locally should resolve the black formatting issues.

Thanks a lot @spamsch 😊

Looks good to me. Personally I would like it if it was rebased and squashed. As right now there are six commits and one of them is a merge commit. I think it will make the project history be better if it was rebased and squashed.

Not sure what @nejch and @max-wittig think.

Thanks a lot @spamsch 😊

Looks good to me. Personally I would like it if it was rebased and squashed. As right now there are six commits and one of them is a merge commit. I think it will make the project history be better if it was rebased and squashed.

Not sure what @nejch and @max-wittig think.

Ok, i can also squash on merge and add the unit tests along with project wiki tests in a follow-up. Just not from my phone on my commute right now.. :D