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
Fix#29000Fix#28685Fix#18568
Related: #27497
And by the way fix#24036, add a Cancel button there (one line)
(cherry picked from commit 5cddab4f74bbb307ddf13e458c7ac22f93b9283a)
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
Follow #29522
Administrators should be able to set a user's email address even if the
email address is not in `EMAIL_DOMAIN_ALLOWLIST`
(cherry picked from commit 136dd99e86eea9c8bfe61b972a12b395655171e8)
Fix#27457
Administrators should be able to manually create any user even if the
user's email address is not in `EMAIL_DOMAIN_ALLOWLIST`.
(cherry picked from commit 4fd9c56ed09b31e2f6164a5f534a31c6624d0478)
Add two "HTMLURL" methods for PackageDescriptor.
And rename "FullWebLink" to "VersionWebLink"
(cherry picked from commit bf6502a8f7a2e9a2b64b43b7733316d863c9a768)
To avoid conflicting with User.GetDisplayName, because there is no data
type in template.
And it matches other methods like GetActFullName / GetActUserName
(cherry picked from commit 3f081d4b54261c1b4ee4f1df40c610fdd9581ef2)
Fixes#28853
Needs both https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/473 and
https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/471 on the runner side and
patched `actions/upload-artifact@v4` / `actions/download-artifact@v4`,
like `christopherhx/gitea-upload-artifact@v4` and
`christopherhx/gitea-download-artifact@v4`, to not return errors due to
GHES not beeing supported yet.
(cherry picked from commit a53d268aca87a281aadc2246541f8749eddcebed)
This PR touches the most interesting part of the "template refactoring".
1. Unclear variable type. Especially for "web/feed/convert.go":
sometimes it uses text, sometimes it uses HTML.
2. Assign text content to "RenderedContent" field, for example: `
project.RenderedContent = project.Description` in web/org/projects.go
3. Assign rendered content to text field, for example: `r.Note =
rendered content` in web/repo/release.go
4. (possible) Incorrectly calling `{{Str2html
.PackageDescriptor.Metadata.ReleaseNotes}}` in
package/content/nuget.tmpl, I guess the name Str2html misleads
developers to use it to "render string to html", but it only sanitizes.
if ReleaseNotes really contains HTML, then this is not a problem.
(cherry picked from commit e71eb8930a5d0f60874b038c223498b41ad65592)
Conflicts:
modules/templates/util_string.go
trivial context conflict
just some refactoring bits towards replacing **util.OptionalBool** with
**optional.Option[bool]**
---------
Co-authored-by: KN4CK3R <admin@oldschoolhack.me>
(cherry picked from commit f6656181e4a07d6c415927220efa2077d509f7c6)
Conflicts:
models/repo/repo_list_test.go
trivial shared fixture count conflicts
just some refactoring bits towards replacing **util.OptionalBool** with
**optional.Option[bool]**
(cherry picked from commit 274c0aea2e88db9bc41690c90e13e8aedf6193d4)
Thanks to inferenceus : some sort orders on the "explore/users" page
could list users by their lastlogintime/updatetime.
It leaks user's activity unintentionally. This PR makes that page only
use "supported" sort orders.
Removing the "sort orders" could also be a good solution, while IMO at
the moment keeping the "create time" and "name" orders is also fine, in
case some users would like to find a target user in the search result,
the "sort order" might help.
(cherry picked from commit eedb8f41297c343d6073a7bab46e4df6ee297a90)
- Disable the CODEOWNERS feature for forked repositories, as it would
otherwise inadvertently request reviewers when for example a pull
request is opened against a forked repository to propose changes to an
existant pull request in the original repository.
- Adds integration test.
- Resolves#2525
- The content history table contains the content history of issues and
comments. For issues they are saved with an comment id of zero.
- If you want to check if the issue has an content history, it should
take into account that SQL has `comment_id = 0`, as it otherwise could
return incorrect results when for example the issue already has an
comment that has an content history.
- Fix the code of `HasIssueContentHistory` to take this into account, it
relied on XORM to generate the SQL from the non-default values of the
struct, this wouldn't generate the `comment_id = 0` SQL as `0` is the
default value of an integer.
- Remove an unncessary log (it's not the responsibility of `models`
code to do logging).
- Adds unit test.
- Resolves#2513
- The CODEOWNER feature relies on the changed files to determine which
reviewers should be added according to the `CODEOWNER` file.
- The current approach was to 'diff' between the base and head branch,
which seems logical but fail in practice when the pull request is out of
date with the base branch. Therefore it should instead diff between the
head branch and the merge base of the head and base branch, so only the
actual affected files by the pull requests are used, the same approach
is used by the diff of an unmerged pull request.
- Add integration testing (for the feature as well).
- Resolves#2458
This PR will also keep the consistent between list assigned users and
check assigned users.
(cherry picked from commit 98ab9445d1020c515c3c789f0b27d952903a2978)
Fix#14459
The following users can add/remove review requests of a PR
- the poster of the PR
- the owner or collaborators of the repository
- members with read permission on the pull requests unit
(cherry picked from commit c42083a33950be6ee9f822c6d0de3c3a79d1f51b)
Conflicts:
models/repo/repo_list_test.go
tests/integration/api_nodeinfo_test.go
tests/integration/api_repo_test.go
shared fixture counts
Adds a new API `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/commits/{sha}/pull` that allows
you to get the merged PR associated to a commit.
---------
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
(cherry picked from commit 0a426cc575734e5eff410d6a790f40473117f753)
- In order to determine if the "Add more..." tab should be shown, the
template has to know if the repository has all units enabled, this is
done in the repository header which can be shown for quite a lot of
pages (code, issues, projects, actions etc.)
- This was previously set in the `RepoRefByType` function, which would
be called by pages such as code, issues and releases, but it was not
being called for all pages such as actions, packages and wiki. Which
would in turn incorrectly show the "Add more..." button when it
shouldn't.
- Now call it from the template itself, so the value is 'always' loaded
when necessary.
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.
(cherry picked from commit f3eb835886031df7a562abc123c3f6011c81eca8)
Conflicts:
modules/web/middleware/binding.go
routers/web/feed/convert.go
tests/integration/branches_test.go
tests/integration/repo_branch_test.go
trivial context conflicts
`KeyID` is never set.
(cherry picked from commit 155269fa586c41a268530c3bb56349e68e6761d7)
Conflicts:
models/user/email_address.go
trivial context conflict
Follow-up of #2282 and #2296 (which tried to address #2278)
One of the issue with the previous PR is that when a conversation on the Files tab was marked as "resolved", it would fetch all the comments for that line (even the outdated ones, which should not be shown on this page - except when explicitly activated).
To properly fix this, I have changed `FetchCodeCommentsByLine` to `FetchCodeConversation`. Its role is to fetch all comments related to a given (review, path, line) and reverted my changes in the template (which were based on a misunderstanding).
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/2306
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: oliverpool <git@olivier.pfad.fr>
Co-committed-by: oliverpool <git@olivier.pfad.fr>
RequestReview get deleted on review.
So we don't have to try to load them on comments.
broken out #28544
(cherry picked from commit 6fad2c874438275d3f69bb1cc223708bd2d27ff6)
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
If a repository administrator is viewing a repository, and there are
units that can be enabled, display an "Add more..." link that leads to
the repository unit settings page.
The goal here is to allow instances to configure a small set of repo
units to be enabled by default, but also highlight for repo admins that
they can add more.
Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
- I found this while doing some unrelated testing in Forgejo. It wasn't
my intention to log failed SQL queries if they were cancelled (which can
happen quite frequently for larger instances) as in those cases it's not
interesting to know which SQL query was run. My intentation was only to
log an SQL query if there was an error reported by the database.
- Ref #2140
Commit 360b3fd17c (Include username in email headers (#28981),
2024-02-03) adds usernames to the From field of notification emails in
the form of `Display Name (@username)`, to prevent spoofing. However,
some email filtering software flags "@" in the display name part of the
From field as potential spoofing, as you could set the display name part
to another email address than the one you are sending from (e.g.
`From: "apparent@email-address" <actual@email-address>`). To avoid
being flagged, instead send emails from `Display Name (username)`.
Closes: #29107
---------
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
(cherry picked from commit 5b2fd0fc19a2a77414c8e2989b4794b6617221f5)
The parameter extraConfigs has never been used anywhere. This PR just
removed it. It can be taken back once it's needed.
(cherry picked from commit 8c6ffdac378654f9d2171ebdbc46becf1571f7fe)
* Split TestPullRequest out of AddTestPullRequestTask
* Before scheduling the task, AddTestPullRequestTask stores the max
index of the repository
* When the task runs, it does not take into account pull requests that
have an index higher than the recorded max index
When AddTestPullRequestTask is called with isSync == true, it is the
direct consequence of a new commit being pushed. Forgejo knows nothing
of this new commit yet. If a PR is created later and its head
references the new commit, it will have an index that is higher and
must not be taken into account. It would be acting and triggering a
notification for a PR based on an event that happened before it
existed.
Refs: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2009
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/2236
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Co-committed-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
(cherry picked from commit b3be895a30)
