Previously, issues were deleted from the indexer only when the repository was deleted.
Individually deleting issues would not remove them from the indexer.
Instead, they were merely hidden due to their IDs being absent from the DB.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/11585
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Shiny Nematoda <snematoda.751k2@aleeas.com>
Co-committed-by: Shiny Nematoda <snematoda.751k2@aleeas.com>
This PR fixes a number of typos throughout the entire repository. Running https://github.com/crate-ci/typos and then changing all occurrences that I naively deemed "safe enough".
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10753
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Christoph Mewes <christoph@kubermatic.com>
Co-committed-by: Christoph Mewes <christoph@kubermatic.com>
- Create `modules/testimport/import.go` to centralize blank import needed for tests (in order to run the `init` function) to simplify maintenance.
- Remove the imports that are not needed.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10662
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: limiting-factor <limiting-factor@posteo.com>
Co-committed-by: limiting-factor <limiting-factor@posteo.com>
- Follow up of forgejo/forgejo!5041, forgejo/forgejo!6074, forgejo/forgejo!8692, forgejo/forgejo!9923
- The `webhook` table contains a encrypted header authorization.
- Use `keying` to safely store this secret and bound them to the table, column and row id
- The migration isn't spectacular but does closely follow what we learned in the previous three migrations: use a transaction and delete records when you can't decrypt them.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10059
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: oliverpool <oliverpool@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
This PR migrates the unmaintaiend `lib/pq` library to `jackc/pgx`, which is the de-facto standard lib in go for postgres connections these days.
Some implementation notes:
We register both `pgx` and `postgresschema` driver names (for backward comp). We can't register `postgres` as this one is still used by `lib/pq` imported by `go-chi/session`, which is in use when users go for the "postgres" session type in the "Session config.
It is questionable if anyone is really using the "postgres" driver option in the session config - but for consistency, it would be good to also migrate to `pgx` there, especially as the code lives within Forgejo under [go-chi/session](https://code.forgejo.org/go-chi/session).
`pgx` supports multi-host notation in the connection string. New tests have been added therefore.
`pgx` also allows for connection string parameters such as `?default_query_exec_mode=simple_protocol`. This should possibly allow running with `pgbouncer` "transaction" mode instead of "session", which could substantially enhance Postgres query handling.
## Checklist
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10219
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: pat-s <patrick.schratz@gmail.com>
Co-committed-by: pat-s <patrick.schratz@gmail.com>
Although #9922 was deployed to Codeberg, it was reported on Matrix that a user observed a `-1` pull request count.
@Gusted checked and verified that the stats stored in redis appeared incorrect, and that no errors occurred on Codeberg that included the repo ID (eg. deadlocks, SQL queries).
```
127.0.0.1:6379> GET Repo:CountPulls:924266
"1"
127.0.0.1:6379> GET Repo:CountPullsClosed:924266
"2"
```
One possible cause is that when `UpdateRepoIssueNumbers` is invoked and invalidates the cache key for the repository, it is currently in a transaction; the next request for that cached count could be computed before the transaction is committed and the update is visible. It's been verified that `UpdateRepoIssueNumbers` is called within a transaction in most interactions (I put a panic in it if `db.InTransaction(ctx)`, and most related tests failed).
This PR fixes that hole by performing the cache invalidation in an `AfterTx()` hook which is invoked after the transaction is committed to the database.
(Another possible cause is documented in #10127)
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10130
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Continuing the pattern from #9868, fixes another deadlock discovered in synthetic testing of #9785. This modifies the `milestone` table to have the `num_issues`, `num_closed_issues`, and `completeness` statistics be calculated asynchronously.
An optional `updateTimestamp` field was added to the stats queue to support the conditional updating of the milestone's modification date, retaining existing functionality.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9916
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
The codeowner features computes the mergebase (I'm not exactly sure why, because this should be stored in the database in `merge_base` column, but if there's no harm to compute it again as that will always be the correct answer) in order to get the changed files between the merge base and the head commit. To do this a function was used that adds a remote... my best reasoning is that this was done because the only function that that was exported on the repository struct had this requirement. Add a new function that *simply* computes the merge base without requiring a remote.
The main benefit of not using a remote is that within Codeberg we are frequently seeing `config.lock` being lingered around (see forgejo/forgejo#1946) so its best to avoid modifying the config when possible - in this case it was completely unnecessary.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9610
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Adds four foreign keys:
- stopwatch -- issue_id -> issue, user_id -> user
- tracked_time -- issue_id -> issue, user_id -> user
The majority of work encompassed in this PR is updating testing and support infrastructure to support foreign keys:
- `models/db/foreign_keys.go` adds new capabilities to sort registered tables into the right insertion order to avoid violating foreign keys
- `RecreateTables`, used by migration testing and the `doctor recreate-table` CLI, has been updated to support tables with foreign keys; new restrictions require that FK-related tables be rebuilt at the same time
- test fixture data is inserted in foreign-key order, and deleted in the reverse
An upgrade to xorm v1.3.9-forgejo.2 is incorporated in this PR, as two unexpected behaviors in the foreign key schema management were discovered during development of the updated `RecreateTables` routine.
Work in this PR is laid out to be reviewed easier commit-by-commit.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [ ] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [x] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9373
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
For pull request templates, Forgejo currently does not look in the `docs` directory, but [GitHub does](https://docs.github.com/en/communities/using-templates-to-encourage-useful-issues-and-pull-requests/creating-a-pull-request-template-for-your-repository#adding-a-pull-request-template). By making Forgejo also look there, it becomes possible to have the same repository work on both sites, without the need for vendor-specific paths.
There was duplication in the list of accepted file paths. On the one hand it’s nice for greppability that they are all spelled out, but it does mean adding 6 variants, I thought it would be more maintainable to deduplicate the Cartesian product. I added one fully spelled out path in the comment to still maintain some greppability.
Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#8284
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8863
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Ruud van Asseldonk <dev@veniogames.com>
Co-committed-by: Ruud van Asseldonk <dev@veniogames.com>
- gopkg.in/yaml.v3 is archived and unmaintained
- go.yaml.in/yaml/v3 is a compatible fork under the umbrella
of https://yaml.org/
### Tests
There is no need for more tests than already provided: it is like an upgrade to a minor version, only from a fork. I browsed the changes and there are some bug fixes. They all seem reasonably minimal. It is not one of those forks that went crazy with breaking changes 😁 And there is a non zero chance that [a bug that matters to Forgejo Actions](https://github.com/yaml/go-yaml/issues/76) is fixed there. It is rare and can wait but it did happen on Codeberg.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8956
Reviewed-by: oliverpool <oliverpool@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Co-committed-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Currently, the documentation mention that a CODEOWNERS file can be located in .forgejo for code owner PR review assignment, but this does not work. Add support for this location.
Resolves#8746
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8773
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: John Moon <john.moon@vts-i.com>
Co-committed-by: John Moon <john.moon@vts-i.com>
Follow-up of !6977
### Manual testing
- User **S** creates an organization **O** and posts a comment **C** (on a random issue);
- User **R** report as abuse the comment **C**, the organization **O** as well as the user **S**;
- User **S** changes the content of comment **C** and the description of organization **O** as well as the description of their own profile;
- Check (within DB) that shadow copies are being created (and linked to corresponding abuse reports) for comment **C**, organization **O** and user **S** and the content is the one from the moment when the reports were submitted (therefore before the updates made by **S**).
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8533
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: floss4good <floss4good@disroot.org>
Co-committed-by: floss4good <floss4good@disroot.org>
Closes#2415
Permissions checks are already done by the callee, which also do more correct permission checks.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7835
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Maxim Slipenko <maks1ms@altlinux.org>
Co-committed-by: Maxim Slipenko <maks1ms@altlinux.org>
- Fixes#7152
- If a review no longer has any pending comments, remove that review from the database.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7454
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Leni Kadali <lenikadali@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: Leni Kadali <lenikadali@noreply.codeberg.org>
- Only send a review request based on the code owner file if the code
owner user has read permissions to the pull requests of that repository.
- This avoids leaking title of PRs from private repository when a
CODEOWNER file is present which contains users that do not have access
to the private repository.
- Found by @oliverpool.
- Integration test added.
(cherry picked from commit f4d3aaeeb9e1b11c5495e4608a3f52f316c35758)
Conflicts:
- modules/charset/charset_test.go
Resolved by manually changing a `=` to `:=`, as per the
original patch. Conflict was due to `require.NoError`.
- When a comment was updated or deleted and was part of an
pending/ongoing review, it would have triggered a notification, such as
a webhook.
- This patch checks if the comment is part of a pending review and then
does not fire a notification and, in the case of updating a comment,
does not save the content history because this is not necessary if it is
still a "draft" comment given it is a pending comment (there is no need
to see my embarrassing typos).
- Adds integration tests.
- Resolves https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/4368
fixes#22907
Tested:
- [x] issue content edit
- [x] issue content change tasklist
- [x] pull request content edit
- [x] pull request change tasklist
(cherry picked from commit aa92b13164e84c26be91153b6022220ce0a27720)
Conflicts:
models/issues/comment.go
c7a389f2b2 [FEAT] allow setting the update date on issues and comments
options/locale/locale_en-US.ini
trivial context conflicts
routers/api/v1/repo/issue_comment.go
routers/api/v1/repo/issue_comment_attachment.go
services/issue/comments.go
services/issue/content.go
user blocking is implemented differently in Forgejo
routers/web/repo/issue.go
trivial difference from 6a0750177f Allow to save empty comment
user blocking is implemented differently in Forgejo
templates/repo/issue/view_content/conversation.tmpl
templates changed a lot in Forgejo but the change is
trivially ported
tests/integration/issue_test.go
other tests were added in the same region
web_src/js/features/repo-issue-edit.js
the code is still web_src/js/features/repo-legacy.js
trivially ported
More about codespell: https://github.com/codespell-project/codespell .
I personally introduced it to dozens if not hundreds of projects already and so far only positive feedback.
```
❯ grep lint-spell Makefile
@echo " - lint-spell lint spelling"
@echo " - lint-spell-fix lint spelling and fix issues"
lint: lint-frontend lint-backend lint-spell
lint-fix: lint-frontend-fix lint-backend-fix lint-spell-fix
.PHONY: lint-spell
lint-spell: lint-codespell
.PHONY: lint-spell-fix
lint-spell-fix: lint-codespell-fix
❯ git grep lint- -- .forgejo/
.forgejo/workflows/testing.yml: - run: make --always-make -j$(nproc) lint-backend checks-backend # ensure the "go-licenses" make target runs
.forgejo/workflows/testing.yml: - run: make lint-frontend
```
so how would you like me to invoke `lint-codespell` on CI? (without that would be IMHO very suboptimal and let typos sneak in)
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/3270
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Yaroslav Halchenko <debian@onerussian.com>
Co-committed-by: Yaroslav Halchenko <debian@onerussian.com>
Noteable additions:
- `redefines-builtin-id` forbid variable names that shadow go builtins
- `empty-lines` remove unnecessary empty lines that `gofumpt` does not
remove for some reason
- `superfluous-else` eliminate more superfluous `else` branches
Rules are also sorted alphabetically and I cleaned up various parts of
`.golangci.yml`.
(cherry picked from commit 74f0c84fa4245a20ce6fb87dac1faf2aeeded2a2)
Conflicts:
.golangci.yml
apply the linter recommendations to Forgejo code as well
Fixes https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/28297
This PR also fixed a problem that it needs a database transaction when
removing the WIP title.
---
Resolves#2771
Also partially ports gitea#29783
(cherry picked from commit 17d7ab5ad4ce3d0fbc1251572c22687c237a30b1)
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
