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
This PR uses `db.ListOptions` instead of `Paginor` to make the code
simpler.
And it also fixed the performance problem when viewing /pulls or
/issues. Before the counting in fact will also do the search.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jason Song <i@wolfogre.com>
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
(cherry picked from commit 3f26fe2fa2c7141c9e622297e50a70f3e0003e4d)
also bleve did match on fuzzy search and the other way around. this also fix that bug.
(cherry picked from commit b9c57fb78e8e0d80d786d8e1da433b6c7ebf2f1c)
Conflicts:
tests/integration/repo_search_test.go
simple conflict resolution in the tests
(cherry picked from commit f8ab9dafb7a173a35e9308f8f784735b0f822439)
Conflicts:
routers/web/repo/fork.go
trivial context conflict, the file does not exist in Forgejo
It's unnecessary to detect the repository object format from git
repository. Just use the repository's object format name.
(cherry picked from commit 3c6fc25a77c37d50686caa495d27a31dcef7f75f)
Conflicts:
services/pull/pull.go
meilisearch does not have an search option to contorl fuzzynes per query
right now:
- https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/issues/1192
- https://github.com/orgs/meilisearch/discussions/377
- https://github.com/meilisearch/meilisearch/discussions/1096
so we have to create a workaround by post-filter the search result in
gitea until this is addressed.
For future works I added an option in backend only atm, to enable
fuzzynes for issue indexer too.
And also refactored the code so the fuzzy option is equal in logic to
code indexer
---
*Sponsored by Kithara Software GmbH*
Conflicts:
routers/web/repo/search.go
trivial context confict s/isMatch/isFuzzy/
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
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
Fix for gitea putting everything into one request without batching and
sending it to Elasticsearch for indexing as issued in #28117
This issue occured in large repositories while Gitea tries to
index the code using ElasticSearch.
I've applied necessary changes that takes batch length from below config
(app.ini)
```
[queue.code_indexer]
BATCH_LENGTH=<length_int>
```
and batches all requests to Elasticsearch in chunks as configured in the
above config
(cherry picked from commit 5c0fc9087211f01375f208d679a1e6de0685320c)
- The [rupture](https://github.com/ethantkoenig/rupture) dependency was
essentially outdated in the sense it was using old version of
dependencies.
- The usage by Forgejo was rather a small portion, so that portion is
now vendored (with its tests).
- Removes old dependencies from go.sum (less dependencies is better for
reviewing what the heck we're importing). Just to note that they were
likely not being used by Go's build process (according to
https://go.dev/ref/mod#minimal-version-selection), so it's really a
matter of formal cleaning up dependencies we don't use and therefor
don't want to download and be in our go.sum.
(cherry picked from commit aa72a5f009)
Conflicts:
go.sum
https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/2148
(cherry picked from commit fbe8d65f0b)
(cherry picked from commit e18debcb6a)
Conflicts:
go.sum
https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/2245
(cherry picked from commit 8c43c2ada8)
(cherry picked from commit a1381d9146fba42cb97d72d38525fa3e721bfb03)
(cherry picked from commit 74714e0246)
(cherry picked from commit 7749dbfe66)
(cherry picked from commit 4379249711)
(cherry picked from commit a69f55bebf)
(cherry picked from commit 24dd5fbfdb)
(cherry picked from commit dda856d6b8)
(cherry picked from commit bc14f4fa97)
(cherry picked from commit 78fef4f137)
(cherry picked from commit 69e013cc51)
(cherry picked from commit f173c6a273)
(cherry picked from commit 92f9d02547)
(cherry picked from commit c99d51e665)
(cherry picked from commit aa0650fd2b)
(cherry picked from commit 0a8ef91302)
(cherry picked from commit 7b54fe01c2)
(cherry picked from commit 0e154f366f)
(cherry picked from commit 02d88ee16d)
(cherry picked from commit 411924e017)
(cherry picked from commit f4e9ca6db5)
(cherry picked from commit cd80126a23)
(cherry picked from commit da626702f9)
(cherry picked from commit 4b81d0bd04)
(cherry picked from commit 53ac260669)
(cherry picked from commit 984081f08d)
(cherry picked from commit 1c39bae3ec)
## 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>
The `ToUTF8*` functions were stripping BOM, while BOM is actually valid
in UTF8, so the stripping must be optional depending on use case. This
does:
- Add a options struct to all `ToUTF8*` functions, that by default will
strip BOM to preserve existing behaviour
- Remove `ToUTF8` function, it was dead code
- Rename `ToUTF8WithErr` to `ToUTF8`
- Preserve BOM in Monaco Editor
- Remove a unnecessary newline in the textarea value. Browsers did
ignore it, it seems but it's better not to rely on this behaviour.
Fixes: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/28743
Related: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/6716 which seems to
have once introduced a mechanism that strips and re-adds the BOM, but
from what I can tell, this mechanism was removed at some point after
that PR.
Refactor Hash interfaces and centralize hash function. This will allow
easier introduction of different hash function later on.
This forms the "no-op" part of the SHA256 enablement patch.
It will fix #28268 .
<img width="1313" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/9418365/cb1e07d5-7a12-4691-a054-8278ba255bfc">
<img width="1318" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/9418365/4fd60820-97f1-4c2c-a233-d3671a5039e9">
## ⚠️ BREAKING ⚠️
But need to give up some features:
<img width="1312" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/9418365/281c0d51-0e7d-473f-bbed-216e2f645610">
However, such abandonment may fix #28055 .
## Backgroud
When the user switches the dashboard context to an org, it means they
want to search issues in the repos that belong to the org. However, when
they switch to themselves, it means all repos they can access because
they may have created an issue in a public repo that they don't own.
<img width="286" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/9418365/182dcd5b-1c20-4725-93af-96e8dfae5b97">
It's a confusing design. Think about this: What does "In your
repositories" mean when the user switches to an org? Repos belong to the
user or the org?
Whatever, it has been broken by #26012 and its following PRs. After the
PR, it searches for issues in repos that the dashboard context user owns
or has been explicitly granted access to, so it causes #28268.
## How to fix it
It's not really difficult to fix it. Just extend the repo scope to
search issues when the dashboard context user is the doer. Since the
user may create issues or be mentioned in any public repo, we can just
set `AllPublic` to true, which is already supported by indexers. The DB
condition will also support it in this PR.
But the real difficulty is how to count the search results grouped by
repos. It's something like "search issues with this keyword and those
filters, and return the total number and the top results. **Then, group
all of them by repo and return the counts of each group.**"
<img width="314" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/9418365/5206eb20-f8f5-49b9-b45a-1be2fcf679f4">
Before #26012, it was being done in the DB, but it caused the results to
be incomplete (see the description of #26012).
And to keep this, #26012 implement it in an inefficient way, just count
the issues by repo one by one, so it cannot work when `AllPublic` is
true because it's almost impossible to do this for all public repos.
1bfcdeef4c/modules/indexer/issues/indexer.go (L318-L338)
## Give up unnecessary features
We may can resovle `TODO: use "group by" of the indexer engines to
implement it`, I'm sure it can be done with Elasticsearch, but IIRC,
Bleve and Meilisearch don't support "group by".
And the real question is, does it worth it? Why should we need to know
the counts grouped by repos?
Let me show you my search dashboard on gitea.com.
<img width="1304" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/9418365/2bca2d46-6c71-4de1-94cb-0c9af27c62ff">
I never think the long repo list helps anything.
And if we agree to abandon it, things will be much easier. That is this
PR.
## TODO
I know it's important to filter by repos when searching issues. However,
it shouldn't be the way we have it now. It could be implemented like
this.
<img width="1316" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/9418365/99ee5f21-cbb5-4dfe-914d-cb796cb79fbe">
The indexers support it well now, but it requires some frontend work,
which I'm not good at. So, I think someone could help do that in another
PR and merge this one to fix the bug first.
Or please block this PR and help to complete it.
Finally, "Switch dashboard context" is also a design that needs
improvement. In my opinion, it can be accomplished by adding filtering
conditions instead of "switching".
Previously only the first term had to be matched. That default
Meilisearch behavior makes sense for e.g. some kind of autocomplete to
find and select a single result. But for filtering issues it means you
can't narrow down results by adding more terms.
This is also more consistent with other indexers and GitHub.
---
Reference:
https://www.meilisearch.com/docs/reference/api/search#matching-strategy
See https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/27718#issuecomment-1773743014
. Add a test to ensure its behavior.
Why this test uses `ProjectBoardID=0`? Because in `SearchOptions`,
`ProjectBoardID=0` means what it is. But in `IssueOptions`,
`ProjectBoardID=0` means there is no condition, and
`ProjectBoardID=db.NoConditionID` means the board ID = 0.
It's really confusing. Probably it's better to separate the db search
engine and the other issue search code. It's really two different
systems. As far as I can see, `IssueOptions` is not necessary for most
of the code, which has very simple issue search conditions.
1. remove unused function `MoveIssueAcrossProjectBoards`
2. extract the project board condition into a function
3. use db.NoCondition instead of -1. (BTW, the usage of db.NoCondition
is too confusing. Is there any way to avoid that?)
4. remove the unnecessary comment since the ctx refactor is completed.
5. Change `b.ID != 0` to `b.ID > 0`. It's more intuitive but I think
they're the same since board ID can't be negative.
assert.Fail() will continue to execute the code while assert.FailNow()
not. I thought those uses of assert.Fail() should exit immediately.
PS: perhaps it's a good idea to use
[require](https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/stretchr/testify/require)
somewhere because the assert package's default behavior does not exit
when an error occurs, which makes it difficult to find the root error
reason.
This PR removed `unittest.MainTest` the second parameter
`TestOptions.GiteaRoot`. Now it detects the root directory by current
working directory.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
As described in the title.
Some points:
1. Why need those tests?
Because `buildIssueOverview` is not well tested, there are several
continuous bugs in the issue overview webpage.
2. Why in indexer_test.go?
It's hard to put those tests in `./modules/indexer/issue/db/db_test.go`
because those tests need 'real' data in db mocked by fixtures instead of
random data in `./modules/indexer/issue/internal/tests`. When using
'real' data(`unittest.PrepareTestDatabase`), `InitIssueIndexer` and the
package `init()` function of `indexer` are required to init indexer.
3. Why only db?
The other three indexer engines are well tested by random data and it's
okay to also test them with 'real' data in db mocked by fixtures. Any
follow-up PR is welcome.
4. Those tests are really basic, any more complicated tests are welcome.
5. I think it's also necessary to add tests in `TestAPISearchIssues`
in`api_test_issue.go` and `TestIssues` in `home_test.go`
Since the issue indexer has been refactored, the issue overview webpage
is built by the `buildIssueOverview` function and underlying
`indexer.Search` function and `GetIssueStats` instead of
`GetUserIssueStats`. So the function is no longer used.
I moved the relevant tests to `indexer_test.go` and since the search
option changed from `IssueOptions` to `SearchOptions`, most of the tests
are useless now.
We need more tests about the db indexer because those tests are highly
connected with the issue overview webpage and now this page has several
bugs.
Any advice about those test cases is appreciated.
---------
Co-authored-by: CaiCandong <50507092+CaiCandong@users.noreply.github.com>
Fix #26723
Add `ChangeDefaultBranch` to the `notifier` interface and implement it
in `indexerNotifier`. So when changing the default branch,
`indexerNotifier` sends a message to the `indexer queue` to update the
index.
---------
Co-authored-by: techknowlogick <matti@mdranta.net>
This PR has multiple parts, and I didn't split them because
it's not easy to test them separately since they are all about the
dashboard page for issues.
1. Support counting issues via indexer to fix #26361
2. Fix repo selection so it also fixes #26653
3. Keep keywords in filter links.
The first two are regressions of #26012.
After:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/9418365/71dfea7e-d9e2-42b6-851a-cc081435c946
Thanks to @CaiCandong for helping with some tests.
Fix #24662.
Replace #24822 and #25708 (although it has been merged)
## Background
In the past, Gitea supported issue searching with a keyword and
conditions in a less efficient way. It worked by searching for issues
with the keyword and obtaining limited IDs (as it is heavy to get all)
on the indexer (bleve/elasticsearch/meilisearch), and then querying with
conditions on the database to find a subset of the found IDs. This is
why the results could be incomplete.
To solve this issue, we need to store all fields that could be used as
conditions in the indexer and support both keyword and additional
conditions when searching with the indexer.
## Major changes
- Redefine `IndexerData` to include all fields that could be used as
filter conditions.
- Refactor `Search(ctx context.Context, kw string, repoIDs []int64,
limit, start int, state string)` to `Search(ctx context.Context, options
*SearchOptions)`, so it supports more conditions now.
- Change the data type stored in `issueIndexerQueue`. Use
`IndexerMetadata` instead of `IndexerData` in case the data has been
updated while it is in the queue. This also reduces the storage size of
the queue.
- Enhance searching with Bleve/Elasticsearch/Meilisearch, make them
fully support `SearchOptions`. Also, update the data versions.
- Keep most logic of database indexer, but remove
`issues.SearchIssueIDsByKeyword` in `models` to avoid confusion where is
the entry point to search issues.
- Start a Meilisearch instance to test it in unit tests.
- Add unit tests with almost full coverage to test
Bleve/Elasticsearch/Meilisearch indexer.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
