# ⚠️ Breaking
Many deprecated queue config options are removed (actually, they should
have been removed in 1.18/1.19).
If you see the fatal message when starting Gitea: "Please update your
app.ini to remove deprecated config options", please follow the error
messages to remove these options from your app.ini.
Example:
```
2023/05/06 19:39:22 [E] Removed queue option: `[indexer].ISSUE_INDEXER_QUEUE_TYPE`. Use new options in `[queue.issue_indexer]`
2023/05/06 19:39:22 [E] Removed queue option: `[indexer].UPDATE_BUFFER_LEN`. Use new options in `[queue.issue_indexer]`
2023/05/06 19:39:22 [F] Please update your app.ini to remove deprecated config options
```
Many options in `[queue]` are are dropped, including:
`WRAP_IF_NECESSARY`, `MAX_ATTEMPTS`, `TIMEOUT`, `WORKERS`,
`BLOCK_TIMEOUT`, `BOOST_TIMEOUT`, `BOOST_WORKERS`, they can be removed
from app.ini.
# The problem
The old queue package has some legacy problems:
* complexity: I doubt few people could tell how it works.
* maintainability: Too many channels and mutex/cond are mixed together,
too many different structs/interfaces depends each other.
* stability: due to the complexity & maintainability, sometimes there
are strange bugs and difficult to debug, and some code doesn't have test
(indeed some code is difficult to test because a lot of things are mixed
together).
* general applicability: although it is called "queue", its behavior is
not a well-known queue.
* scalability: it doesn't seem easy to make it work with a cluster
without breaking its behaviors.
It came from some very old code to "avoid breaking", however, its
technical debt is too heavy now. It's a good time to introduce a better
"queue" package.
# The new queue package
It keeps using old config and concept as much as possible.
* It only contains two major kinds of concepts:
* The "base queue": channel, levelqueue, redis
* They have the same abstraction, the same interface, and they are
tested by the same testing code.
* The "WokerPoolQueue", it uses the "base queue" to provide "worker
pool" function, calls the "handler" to process the data in the base
queue.
* The new code doesn't do "PushBack"
* Think about a queue with many workers, the "PushBack" can't guarantee
the order for re-queued unhandled items, so in new code it just does
"normal push"
* The new code doesn't do "pause/resume"
* The "pause/resume" was designed to handle some handler's failure: eg:
document indexer (elasticsearch) is down
* If a queue is paused for long time, either the producers blocks or the
new items are dropped.
* The new code doesn't do such "pause/resume" trick, it's not a common
queue's behavior and it doesn't help much.
* If there are unhandled items, the "push" function just blocks for a
few seconds and then re-queue them and retry.
* The new code doesn't do "worker booster"
* Gitea's queue's handlers are light functions, the cost is only the
go-routine, so it doesn't make sense to "boost" them.
* The new code only use "max worker number" to limit the concurrent
workers.
* The new "Push" never blocks forever
* Instead of creating more and more blocking goroutines, return an error
is more friendly to the server and to the end user.
There are more details in code comments: eg: the "Flush" problem, the
strange "code.index" hanging problem, the "immediate" queue problem.
Almost ready for review.
TODO:
* [x] add some necessary comments during review
* [x] add some more tests if necessary
* [x] update documents and config options
* [x] test max worker / active worker
* [x] re-run the CI tasks to see whether any test is flaky
* [x] improve the `handleOldLengthConfiguration` to provide more
friendly messages
* [x] fine tune default config values (eg: length?)
## Code coverage:
Adding the related comment to the issue and pull request status change
in the UI notifications allows to navigate directly to the specific
event in its dedicated view, easing the reading of last comments and to
the editor for additional comments if desired.
The `commit_id` property name is the same as equivalent functionality in
GitHub. If the action was not caused by a commit, an empty string is
used.
This can for example be used to automatically add a Resolved label to an
issue fixed by a commit, or clear it when the issue is reopened.
Previously, there was an `import services/webhooks` inside
`modules/notification/webhook`.
This import was removed (after fighting against many import cycles).
Additionally, `modules/notification/webhook` was moved to
`modules/webhook`,
and a few structs/constants were extracted from `models/webhooks` to
`modules/webhook`.
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Close#14601Fix#3690
Revive of #14601.
Updated to current code, cleanup and added more read/write checks.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Signed-off-by: Andre Bruch <ab@andrebruch.com>
Co-authored-by: zeripath <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: Norwin <git@nroo.de>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Change all license headers to comply with REUSE specification.
Fix#16132
Co-authored-by: flynnnnnnnnnn <flynnnnnnnnnn@github>
Co-authored-by: John Olheiser <john.olheiser@gmail.com>
This PR adds a context parameter to a bunch of methods. Some helper
`xxxCtx()` methods got replaced with the normal name now.
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
I found myself wondering whether a PR I scheduled for automerge was
actually merged. It was, but I didn't receive a mail notification for it
- that makes sense considering I am the doer and usually don't want to
receive such notifications. But ideally I want to receive a notification
when a PR was merged because I scheduled it for automerge.
This PR implements exactly that.
The implementation works, but I wonder if there's a way to avoid passing
the "This PR was automerged" state down so much. I tried solving this
via the database (checking if there's an automerge scheduled for this PR
when sending the notification) but that did not work reliably, probably
because sending the notification happens async and the entry might have
already been deleted. My implementation might be the most
straightforward but maybe not the most elegant.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
At the moment a repository reference is needed for webhooks. With the
upcoming package PR we need to send webhooks without a repository
reference. For example a package is uploaded to an organization. In
theory this enables the usage of webhooks for future user actions.
This PR removes the repository id from `HookTask` and changes how the
hooks are processed (see `services/webhook/deliver.go`). In a follow up
PR I want to remove the usage of the `UniqueQueue´ and replace it with a
normal queue because there is no reason to be unique.
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Fixes#21379
The commits are capped by `setting.UI.FeedMaxCommitNum` so
`len(commits)` is not the correct number. So this PR adds a new
`TotalCommits` field.
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Add support for triggering webhook notifications on wiki changes.
This PR contains frontend and backend for webhook notifications on wiki actions (create a new page, rename a page, edit a page and delete a page). The frontend got a new checkbox under the Custom Event -> Repository Events section. There is only one checkbox for create/edit/rename/delete actions, because it makes no sense to separate it and others like releases or packages follow the same schema.
The actions itself are separated, so that different notifications will be executed (with the "action" field). All the webhook receivers implement the new interface method (Wiki) and the corresponding tests.
When implementing this, I encounter a little bug on editing a wiki page. Creating and editing a wiki page is technically the same action and will be handled by the ```updateWikiPage``` function. But the function need to know if it is a new wiki page or just a change. This distinction is done by the ```action``` parameter, but this will not be sent by the frontend (on form submit). This PR will fix this by adding the ```action``` parameter with the values ```_new``` or ```_edit```, which will be used by the ```updateWikiPage``` function.
I've done integration tests with matrix and gitea (http).
Fix#16457
Signed-off-by: Aaron Fischer <mail@aaron-fischer.net>
Sometimes users want to receive email notifications of messages they create or reply to,
Added an option to personal preferences to allow users to choose
Closes#20149
Support synchronizing with the push mirrors whenever new commits are pushed or synced from pull mirror.
Related Issues: #18220
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: zeripath <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
* Move access and repo permission to models/perm/access
* fix test
* fix git test
* Move functions sequence
* Some improvements per @KN4CK3R and @delvh
* Move issues related code to models/issues
* Move some issues related sub package
* Merge
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Rename some files
Add new feature to delete issues and pulls via API
Co-authored-by: fnetx <git@fralix.ovh>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <williamzijl7@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
We can't depend on `latest` version of gofumpt because the output will
not be stable across versions. Lock it down to the latest version
released yesterday and run it again.
I want to address #17892, where emails notifications are not sent to assignees (issue and PR) and reviewers (PR) when they have the email setting Only email on mention enabled.
From the user experience perspective, when a user gets a issue/PR assigned or a PR review request, he/she would expect to be implicitly mentioned since the assignment or request is personal and targeting a single person only. Thus I see #17892 as a bug. Could we therefore mark this ticket as such?
The changed code just explicitly checks for the EmailNotificationsOnMention setting beside the existing EmailNotificationsEnabled check. Too rude?
@lunny mentioned a mock mail server for tests, is there something ready. How could I make use of it?
#12774 (comment)
Fix#17892
* Start adding mechanism to return unhandled data
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Create pushback interface
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Add Pausable interface to WorkerPool and Manager
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Implement Pausable and PushBack for the bytefifos
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Implement Pausable and Pushback for ChannelQueues and ChannelUniqueQueues
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Wire in UI for pausing
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* add testcases and fix a few issues
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* fix build
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* prevent "race" in the test
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* fix jsoniter mismerge
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* fix conflicts
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* fix format
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Add warnings for no worker configurations and prevent data-loss with redis/levelqueue
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Use StopTimer
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: techknowlogick <techknowlogick@gitea.io>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
* Add config option to hide issue events
Adds a config option `HIDE_ISSUE_EVENTS` to hide most issue events (changed labels, milestones, projects...) on the issue detail page.
If this is true, only the following events (comment types) are shown:
* plain comments
* closed/reopned/merged
* reviews
* Make configurable using a list
* Add docs
* Add missing newline
* Fix merge issues
* Allow changes per user settings
* Fix lint
* Rm old docs
* Apply suggestions from code review
* Use bitsets
* Rm comment
* fmt
* Fix lint
* Use variable/constant to provide key
* fmt
* fix lint
* refactor
* Add a prefix for user setting key
* Add license comment
* Add license comment
* Update services/forms/user_form_hidden_comments.go
Co-authored-by: Gusted <williamzijl7@hotmail.com>
* check len == 0
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: zeripath <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <williamzijl7@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
This PR continues the work in #17125 by progressively ensuring that git
commands run within the request context.
This now means that the if there is a git repo already open in the context it will be used instead of reopening it.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Some refactors related repository model
* Move more methods out of repository
* Move repository into models/repo
* Fix test
* Fix test
* some improvements
* Remove unnecessary function
* Fix a panic in NotifyCreateIssueComment (caused by string truncation)
* more unit tests
* refactor
* fix some edge cases
* use SplitStringAtByteN for comment content
- Use the provided `doer` instead of `rel.Publisher`. The code will also
run on edited releases and deleted ones, which isn't necessary done by
`rel.Publisher`.
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
The functioning of the code indexer queue really only makes sense as an unique queue
and doing this allows use to simplify the indexer data to simply delete the data if
the repo is no longer in the db.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
wxiaoguang
Jason Song
Felipe Leopoldo Sologuren Gutiérrez
Brecht Van Lommel
delvh
KN4CK3R
Lunny Xiao
flynnnnnnnnnn
kolaente
Aaron F
Tyrone Yeh
Chongyi Zheng
6543
Otto Richter (fnetX)
silverwind
flozzone
zeripath
qwerty287
Gusted
