Commit graph

17 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Denys Konovalov
8ffb9c6fb1
Add default board to new projects, remove uncategorized pseudo-board (#29874)
On creation of an empty project (no template) a default board will be
created instead of falling back to the uneditable pseudo-board.

Every project now has to have exactly one default boards. As a
consequence, you cannot unset a board as default, instead you have to
set another board as default. Existing projects will be modified using a
cron job, additionally this check will run every midnight by default.

Deleting the default board is not allowed, you have to set another board
as default to do it.

Fixes #29873
Fixes #14679 along the way
Fixes #29853

Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
(cherry picked from commit e5160185ed65fd1c2bcb2fc7dc7e0b5514ddb299)

Conflicts:
	options/locale/locale_en-US.ini
	trivial conflict because Forgejo strings do not have
	surrounding double quotes
2024-03-30 07:17:31 +01:00
Lunny Xiao
b019ecce89
Do some performance optimize for issues list and view issue/pull (#29515) (migration only)
Refs: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/2679#issuecomment-1720941
2024-03-30 07:17:31 +01:00
oliverpool
12e317c198
add test for webhook migration 2024-03-11 23:37:00 +07:00
oliverpool
53f6f62ad4
Store webhook event in database (#29145)
Refactor the webhook logic, to have the type-dependent processing happen
only in one place.

---

1. An event happens
2. It is pre-processed (depending on the webhook type) and its body is
added to a task queue
3. When the task is processed, some more logic (depending on the webhook
type as well) is applied to make an HTTP request

This means that webhook-type dependant logic is needed in step 2 and 3.
This is cumbersome and brittle to maintain.

Updated webhook flow with this PR:
1. An event happens
2. It is stored as-is and added to a task queue
3. When the task is processed, the event is processed (depending on the
webhook type) to make an HTTP request

So the only webhook-type dependent logic happens in one place (step 3)
which should be much more robust.

- the raw event must be stored in the hooktask (until now, the
pre-processed body was stored)
- to ensure that previous hooktasks are correctly sent, a
`payload_version` is added (version 1: the body has already been
pre-process / version 2: the body is the raw event)

So future webhook additions will only have to deal with creating an
http.Request based on the raw event (no need to adjust the code in
multiple places, like currently).

Moreover since this processing happens when fetching from the task
queue, it ensures that the queuing of new events (upon a `git push` for
instance) does not get slowed down by a slow webhook.

As a concrete example, the PR #19307 for custom webhooks, should be
substantially smaller:
- no need to change `services/webhook/deliver.go`
- minimal change in `services/webhook/webhook.go` (add the new webhook
to the map)
- no need to change all the individual webhook files (since with this
refactor the `*webhook_model.Webhook` is provided as argument)

(cherry picked from commit 26653b196bd1d15c532af41f60351596dd4330bd)

Conflicts:
	services/webhook/deliver_test.go
	trivial context conflict
2024-03-11 23:36:59 +07:00
wxiaoguang
7ea8993a0e
Make wiki default branch name changable (#29603) (database migration ony)
Fix #29000
Fix #28685
Fix #18568

Related: #27497

And by the way fix #24036, add a Cancel button there (one line)

(cherry picked from commit 5cddab4f74bbb307ddf13e458c7ac22f93b9283a)
2024-03-11 23:36:59 +07:00
KN4CK3R
8bf280a686
Add user blocking (#29028) (database migration ony)
Fixes #17453

This PR adds the abbility to block a user from a personal account or
organization to restrict how the blocked user can interact with the
blocker. The docs explain what's the consequence of blocking a user.

Screenshots:

![grafik](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/1666336/4ed884f3-e06a-4862-afd3-3b8aa2488dc6)

![grafik](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/1666336/ae6d4981-f252-4f50-a429-04f0f9f1cdf1)

![grafik](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/1666336/ca153599-5b0f-4b4a-90fe-18bdfd6f0b6b)

---------

Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
(cherry picked from commit c337ff0ec70618ef2ead7850f90ab2a8458db192)
2024-03-11 23:36:59 +07:00
Lunny Xiao
97c8dbf332
Fix bug hidden on CI and make ci failed if tests failure (#29254)
The tests on migration tests failed but CI reports successfully

https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/actions/runs/7364373807/job/20044685969#step:8:141

This PR will fix the bug on migration v283 and also the CI hidden
behaviour.

The reason is on the Makefile

`GITEA_ROOT="$(CURDIR)" GITEA_CONF=tests/mysql.ini $(GO) test
$(GOTESTFLAGS) -tags='$(TEST_TAGS)' $(MIGRATE_TEST_PACKAGES)` will
return the error exit code.

But

`for pkg in $(shell $(GO) list
code.gitea.io/gitea/models/migrations/...); do \
GITEA_ROOT="$(CURDIR)" GITEA_CONF=tests/mysql.ini $(GO) test
$(GOTESTFLAGS) -tags '$(TEST_TAGS)' $$pkg; \
	done`

will not work.

This also fix #29602

(cherry picked from commit 45277486c2c6213b7766b1da708a991cdb1f3565)

Conflicts:
	.github/workflows/pull-db-tests.yml
	Makefile
	models/migrations/v1_22/v283.go
	models/migrations/v1_22/v286_test.go
	models/migrations/v1_22/v287_test.go
	already in Forgejo for the Makefile & CI logic but Gitea changes
	otherwise rule
2024-03-11 23:36:59 +07:00
techknowlogick
82b7de1360
Add admin API route for managing user's badges (#23106) (database migration ony)
Fix #22785

---------

Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit cb52b17f92e2d2293f7c003649743464492bca48)

Conflicts:
	discard everything except the database migration
2024-03-11 23:36:59 +07:00
Gusted
e8c1bfc2e5
[CI] Fix false positive in database migration
- This also means that if one of the test fails, it will actually
propagate to make and subsequently fail the test.
- Remove the 'delete duplicates issue users' code, I checked this
against my local development database (which contains quite bizarre
cases, even some that Forgejo does not like), my local instance database
and against Codeberg production and they all yielded no results to this
query, so I'm removing it thus resolving the error that the delete code
was not compatible with Mysql.
- Sync all tables that are requires by the migration in the test.
- Resolves #2206

(cherry picked from commit 8e02be7e89a76ccbc3f8a58577be0fcc34e1469e)
(cherry picked from commit 006f06441645d864fc27ca30352367b3afafc5bb)
2024-02-05 13:33:59 +01:00
Adam Majer
d68a613ba8
Add support for sha256 repositories (#23894)
Currently only SHA1 repositories are supported by Gitea. This adds
support for alternate SHA256 with the additional aim of easier support
for additional hash types in the future.

Fixes: #13794
Limited by: https://github.com/go-git/go-git/issues/899
Depend on: #28138

<img width="776" alt="图片" src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/81045/5448c9a7-608e-4341-a149-5dd0069c9447">

---------

Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
2024-01-19 17:05:02 +01:00
yp05327
07ba4d9f87
Fix incorrect action duration time when rerun the job before executed once (#28364)
Fix #28323
Reason was mentioned here:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/28323#issuecomment-1841867298

### Changes: (maybe breaking)
We can rerun jobs in Gitea, so there will be some problems in
calculating duration time.
In this PR, I use the exist `Started` and `Stopped` column to record the
last run time instead of the total time,
and add a new `PreviousDuration` column to record the previous duration
time.
You can also check the cost time of last run:

![image](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/18380374/2ca39145-2c92-401a-b78b-43164f7ae061)
2024-01-19 14:05:49 +00:00
Jimmy Praet
5d3fdd1212
Add branch protection setting for ignoring stale approvals (#28498)
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>
2024-01-15 07:20:01 +00:00
Lunny Xiao
cb10f2767c
Fix migration test (#28659) 2023-12-30 21:54:48 +08:00
sebastian-sauer
e08f1a9cbd
Add combined index for issue_user.uid and issue_id (#28080)
fixes #27877

---------

Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
2023-12-14 09:26:59 +00:00
JakobDev
c8602a8dfa
Add Index to pull_auto_merge.doer_id (#27811)
Reported at https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/1677

This column is used by
[deleteUser](f089be91da/services/user/delete.go (L90)).

Note: This PR contains a Migration, so we can't backport it to 1.21.
2023-10-30 08:39:29 +00:00
KN4CK3R
c6c829fe3f
Enhanced auth token / remember me (#27606)
Closes #27455

> The mechanism responsible for long-term authentication (the 'remember
me' cookie) uses a weak construction technique. It will hash the user's
hashed password and the rands value; it will then call the secure cookie
code, which will encrypt the user's name with the computed hash. If one
were able to dump the database, they could extract those two values to
rebuild that cookie and impersonate a user. That vulnerability exists
from the date the dump was obtained until a user changed their password.
> 
> To fix this security issue, the cookie could be created and verified
using a different technique such as the one explained at
https://paragonie.com/blog/2015/04/secure-authentication-php-with-long-term-persistence#secure-remember-me-cookies.

The PR removes the now obsolete setting `COOKIE_USERNAME`.
2023-10-14 00:56:41 +00:00
silverwind
023e937141
Rename the default themes to gitea-light, gitea-dark, gitea-auto (#27419)
Part of https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/27097:

- `gitea` theme is renamed to `gitea-light`
- `arc-green` theme is renamed to `gitea-dark`
- `auto` theme is renamed to `gitea-auto`

I put both themes in separate CSS files, removing all colors from the
base CSS. Existing users will be migrated to the new theme names. The
dark theme recolor will follow in a separate PR.

## ⚠️ BREAKING ⚠️

1. If there are existing custom themes with the names `gitea-light` or
`gitea-dark`, rename them before this upgrade and update the `theme`
column in the `user` table for each affected user.
2. The theme in `<html>` has moved from `class="theme-name"` to
`data-theme="name"`, existing customizations that depend on should be
updated.

---------

Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
2023-10-06 09:46:36 +02:00