GitLab generates "system notes" whenever an event happens within the
platform. Unlike Gitea, those events are stored and retrieved as text
comments with no semantic details. The only way to tell whether a
comment was generated in this manner is the `system` flag on the note
type.
This PR adds detection for two specific kinds of events: Scheduling and
un-scheduling of automatic merges on a PR. When detected, they are
downloaded using Gitea's type for these events, and eventually uploaded
into Gitea in the expected format, i.e. with no text content in the
comment.
This PR also updates the template used to render comments to add support
for migrated comments of these two types.
ref:
11bd6dc826/app/services/system_notes/merge_requests_service.rb (L6-L17)
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/27172#discussion_r1493735466
When cleanup artifacts, it removes storage first. If storage is not
exist (maybe delete manually), it gets error and continue loop. It makes
a dead loop if there are a lot pending but non-existing artifacts.
Now it updates db record at first to avoid keep a lot of pending status
artifacts.
Fix#29166
Add support for the following activity types of `pull_request`
- assigned
- unassigned
- review_requested
- review_request_removed
- milestoned
- demilestoned
There is a missing newline when generating the debian apt repo InRelease
file, which results in output like:
```
[...]
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 05:03:01 UTC
Acquire-By-Hash: yesMD5Sum:
51a518dbddcd569ac3e0cebf330c800a 3018 main-dev/binary-amd64/Packages
[...]
```
It appears this would probably result in apt ignoring the
Acquire-By-Hash setting and not using the by-hash functionality,
although I'm not sure how to confirm it.
Old code is not consistent for generating & decoding the JWT secrets.
Now, the callers only need to use 2 consistent functions:
NewJwtSecretWithBase64 and DecodeJwtSecretBase64
And remove a non-common function Base64FixedDecode from util.go
Continuation of https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/25439. Fixes#847
Before:
<img width="1296" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/32161460/24571ac8-b254-43c9-b178-97340f0dc8a9">
----
After:
<img width="1296" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/32161460/c60b2459-9d10-4d42-8d83-d5ef0f45bf94">
---
#### Overview
This is the implementation of a requested feature: Contributors graph
(#847)
It makes Activity page a multi-tab page and adds a new tab called
Contributors. Contributors tab shows the contribution graphs over time
since the repository existed. It also shows per user contribution graphs
for top 100 contributors. Top 100 is calculated based on the selected
contribution type (commits, additions or deletions).
---
#### Demo
(The demo is a bit old but still a good example to show off the main
features)
<video src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/32161460/9f68103f-8145-4cc2-94bc-5546daae7014" controls width="320" height="240">
<a href="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/32161460/9f68103f-8145-4cc2-94bc-5546daae7014">Download</a>
</video>
#### Features:
- Select contribution type (commits, additions or deletions)
- See overall and per user contribution graphs for the selected
contribution type
- Zoom and pan on graphs to see them in detail
- See top 100 contributors based on the selected contribution type and
selected time range
- Go directly to users' profile by clicking their name if they are
registered gitea users
- Cache the results so that when the same repository is visited again
fetching data will be faster
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: hiifong <i@hiif.ong>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: yp05327 <576951401@qq.com>
Clarify when "string" should be used (and be escaped), and when
"template.HTML" should be used (no need to escape)
And help PRs like #29059 , to render the error messages correctly.
With this option, it is possible to require a linear commit history with
the following benefits over the next best option `Rebase+fast-forward`:
The original commits continue existing, with the original signatures
continuing to stay valid instead of being rewritten, there is no merge
commit, and reverting commits becomes easier.
Closes#24906
The old code `GetTemplatesFromDefaultBranch(...) ([]*api.IssueTemplate,
map[string]error)` doesn't really follow Golang's habits, then the
second returned value might be misused. For example, the API function
`GetIssueTemplates` incorrectly checked the second returned value and
always responds 500 error.
This PR refactors GetTemplatesFromDefaultBranch to
ParseTemplatesFromDefaultBranch and clarifies its behavior, and fixes the
API endpoint bug, and adds some tests.
And by the way, add proper prefix `X-` for the header generated in
`checkDeprecatedAuthMethods`, because non-standard HTTP headers should
have `X-` prefix, and it is also consistent with the new code in
`GetIssueTemplates`
Outgoing new release e-mail notifications were missing links to the
actual release. An example from Codeberg.org e-mail:
<a href=3D"">View it on Codeberg.org</a>.<br/>
This PR adds `"Link"` context property pointing to the release on the
web interface.
The change was tested using `[mailer] PROTOCOL=dummy`.
Signed-off-by: Wiktor Kwapisiewicz <wiktor@metacode.biz>
Resolves https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/28704
Example of an entry in the generated `APKINDEX` file:
```
C:Q1xCO3H9LTTEbhKt9G1alSC87I56c=
P:hello
V:2.12-r1
A:x86_64
T:The GNU Hello program produces a familiar, friendly greeting
U:https://www.gnu.org/software/hello/
L:GPL-3.0-or-later
S:15403
I:36864
o:hello
m:
t:1705934118
D:so:libc.musl-x86_64.so.1
p:cmd:hello=2.12-r1
i:foobar=1.0 !baz
k:42
```
the `i:` and `k:` entries are new.
---------
Co-authored-by: KN4CK3R <admin@oldschoolhack.me>
Fixes#28660
Fixes an admin api bug related to `user.LoginSource`
Fixed `/user/emails` response not identical to GitHub api
This PR unifies the user update methods. The goal is to keep the logic
only at one place (having audit logs in mind). For example, do the
password checks only in one method not everywhere a password is updated.
After that PR is merged, the user creation should be next.
Emails from Gitea comments do not contain the username of the commenter
anywhere, only their display name, so it is not possible to verify who
made a comment from the email itself:
From: "Alice" <email@gitea>
X-Gitea-Sender: Alice
X-Gitea-Recipient: Bob
X-GitHub-Sender: Alice
X-GitHub-Recipient: Bob
This comment looks like it's from @alice.
The X-Gitea/X-GitHub headers also use display names, which is not very
reliable for filtering, and inconsistent with GitHub's behavior:
X-GitHub-Sender: lunny
X-GitHub-Recipient: gwymor
This change includes both the display name and username in the From
header, and switches the other headers from display name to username:
From: "Alice (@fakealice)" <email@gitea>
X-Gitea-Sender: fakealice
X-Gitea-Recipient: bob
X-GitHub-Sender: fakealice
X-GitHub-Recipient: bob
This comment looks like it's from @alice.
This change allows act_runner / actions_runner to use jwt tokens for
`ACTIONS_RUNTIME_TOKEN` that are compatible with
actions/upload-artifact@v4.
The official Artifact actions are now validating and extracting the jwt
claim scp to get the runid and jobid, the old artifact backend also
needs to accept the same token jwt.
---
Related to #28853
I'm not familar with the auth system, maybe you know how to improve this
I have tested
- the jwt token is a valid token for artifact uploading
- the jwt token can be parsed by actions/upload-artifact@v4 and passes
their scp claim validation
Next steps would be a new artifacts@v4 backend.
~~I'm linking the act_runner change soonish.~~
act_runner change to make the change effective and use jwt tokens
<https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/471>
In #28691, schedule plans will be deleted when a repo's actions unit is
disabled. But when the unit is enabled, the schedule plans won't be
created again.
This PR fixes the bug. The schedule plans will be created again when the
actions unit is re-enabled
## Purpose
This is a refactor toward building an abstraction over managing git
repositories.
Afterwards, it does not matter anymore if they are stored on the local
disk or somewhere remote.
## What this PR changes
We used `git.OpenRepository` everywhere previously.
Now, we should split them into two distinct functions:
Firstly, there are temporary repositories which do not change:
```go
git.OpenRepository(ctx, diskPath)
```
Gitea managed repositories having a record in the database in the
`repository` table are moved into the new package `gitrepo`:
```go
gitrepo.OpenRepository(ctx, repo_model.Repo)
```
Why is `repo_model.Repository` the second parameter instead of file
path?
Because then we can easily adapt our repository storage strategy.
The repositories can be stored locally, however, they could just as well
be stored on a remote server.
## Further changes in other PRs
- A Git Command wrapper on package `gitrepo` could be created. i.e.
`NewCommand(ctx, repo_model.Repository, commands...)`. `git.RunOpts{Dir:
repo.RepoPath()}`, the directory should be empty before invoking this
method and it can be filled in the function only. #28940
- Remove the `RepoPath()`/`WikiPath()` functions to reduce the
possibility of mistakes.
---------
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Fixes#28699
This PR implements the `MigrateRepository` method for `actionsNotifier`
to detect the schedules from the workflow files in the migrated
repository.
The method can't be called with an outer transaction because if the user
is not a collaborator the outer transaction will be rolled back even if
the inner transaction uses the no-error path.
`has == 0` leads to `return nil` which cancels the transaction. A
standalone call of this method does nothing but if used with an outer
transaction, that will be canceled.
Sometimes you need to work on a feature which depends on another (unmerged) feature.
In this case, you may create a PR based on that feature instead of the main branch.
Currently, such PRs will be closed without the possibility to reopen in case the parent feature is merged and its branch is deleted.
Automatic target branch change make life a lot easier in such cases.
Github and Bitbucket behave in such way.
Example:
$PR_1$: main <- feature1
$PR_2$: feature1 <- feature2
Currently, merging $PR_1$ and deleting its branch leads to $PR_2$ being closed without the possibility to reopen.
This is both annoying and loses the review history when you open a new PR.
With this change, $PR_2$ will change its target branch to main ($PR_2$: main <- feature2) after $PR_1$ has been merged and its branch has been deleted.
This behavior is enabled by default but can be disabled.
For security reasons, this target branch change will not be executed when merging PRs targeting another repo.
Fixes#27062Fixes#18408
---------
Co-authored-by: Denys Konovalov <kontakt@denyskon.de>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Fixes#22236
---
Error occurring currently while trying to revert commit using read-tree
-m approach:
> 2022/12/26 16:04:43 ...rvices/pull/patch.go:240:AttemptThreeWayMerge()
[E] [63a9c61a] Unable to run read-tree -m! Error: exit status 128 -
fatal: this operation must be run in a work tree
> - fatal: this operation must be run in a work tree
We need to clone a non-bare repository for `git read-tree -m` to work.
bb371aee6e
adds support to create a non-bare cloned temporary upload repository.
After cloning a non-bare temporary upload repository, we [set default
index](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/main/services/repository/files/cherry_pick.go#L37)
(`git read-tree HEAD`).
This operation ends up resetting the git index file (see investigation
details below), due to which, we need to call `git update-index
--refresh` afterward.
Here's the diff of the index file before and after we execute
SetDefaultIndex: https://www.diffchecker.com/hyOP3eJy/
Notice the **ctime**, **mtime** are set to 0 after SetDefaultIndex.
You can reproduce the same behavior using these steps:
```bash
$ git clone https://try.gitea.io/me-heer/test.git -s -b main
$ cd test
$ git read-tree HEAD
$ git read-tree -m 1f085d7ed8 1f085d7ed8 9933caed00
error: Entry '1' not uptodate. Cannot merge.
```
After which, we can fix like this:
```
$ git update-index --refresh
$ git read-tree -m 1f085d7ed8 1f085d7ed8 9933caed00
```
As more and more options can be set for creating the repository, I don't
think we should put all of them into the creation web page which will
make things look complicated and confusing.
And I think we need some rules about how to decide which should/should
not be put in creating a repository page. One rule I can imagine is if
this option can be changed later and it's not a MUST on the creation,
then it can be removed on the page. So I found trust model is the first
one.
This PR removed the trust model selections on creating a repository web
page and kept others as before.
This is also a preparation for #23894 which will add a choice about SHA1
or SHA256 that cannot be changed once the repository created.
Fixes#26548
This PR refactors the rendering of markup links. The old code uses
`strings.Replace` to change some urls while the new code uses more
context to decide which link should be generated.
The added tests should ensure the same output for the old and new
behaviour (besides the bug).
We may need to refactor the rendering a bit more to make it clear how
the different helper methods render the input string. There are lots of
options (resolve links / images / mentions / git hashes / emojis / ...)
but you don't really know what helper uses which options. For example,
we currently support images in the user description which should not be
allowed I think:
<details>
<summary>Profile</summary>
https://try.gitea.io/KN4CK3R
</details>
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Fixes#27114.
* In Gitea 1.12 (#9532), a "dismiss stale approvals" branch protection
setting was introduced, for ignoring stale reviews when verifying the
approval count of a pull request.
* In Gitea 1.14 (#12674), the "dismiss review" feature was added.
* This caused confusion with users (#25858), as "dismiss" now means 2
different things.
* In Gitea 1.20 (#25882), the behavior of the "dismiss stale approvals"
branch protection was modified to actually dismiss the stale review.
For some users this new behavior of dismissing the stale reviews is not
desirable.
So this PR reintroduces the old behavior as a new "ignore stale
approvals" branch protection setting.
---------
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Sebastian Brückner
Lunny Xiao
vincent
Johan Van de Wauw
KN4CK3R
Markus Amshove
Jason Song
wxiaoguang
FuXiaoHei
yp05327
Robin Schoonover
Şahin Akkaya
techknowlogick
Chris Copeland
Zettat123
Wiktor Kwapisiewicz
Sergey Bugaev
Bram Hagens
Gwyneth Morgan
silverwind
ChristopherHX
JakobDev
Adam Majer
Viktor Kuzmin
Mihir Joshi
Jimmy Praet