This is a continuation of #2728, with a test case added.
Fixes #2633.
I kept @zareck 's commit as is, because I believe it is correct. We can't move the check to `owner.CanForkRepo()`, because `owner` is the future owner of the forked repo, and may be an organization. We need to check the admin permission of the `doer`, like in the case of repository creation.
I verified that the test fails without the `ForkRepository` change, and passes with it.
Co-authored-by: Cassio Zareck <cassiomilczareck@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/3277
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
Co-committed-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
(cherry picked from commit ea4071ca9f)
- Previously translations were escaped, but now translations are
accepted as-is and will be rendered as HTML. Use `TrString` to escape
the translation value.
- Adds integration test.
- Regression of 65248945c9.
- Resolves #3260
(cherry picked from commit a0f47b8de7)
- This is a partial revert of c2280a2009,
it was already fixed upstream, but not for the `.basic` variant.
- Resolves #3252
(cherry picked from commit 7fcb9c3636)
Fix #30378
(cherry picked from commit 0fe9f93eb4c94d55e43b18b9c3cc6d513a34c0b5)
Conflicts:
- models/organization/org.go
- services/repository/delete.go
- services/user/delete.go
In all three cases, conflicts were resolved by manually adding
the lines added by the Gitea patch, keeping the Forgejo code
surrounding them.
- `RemoveFilesFromIndex` used an hardcoded empty commit ID for the SHA1
object format, this would result in an error if the repository was
initialized to use the sha256 object format. Get the object format of
the Git repository and use that to get the empty commit id.
- Adds unit test.
- Resolves #3184
(cherry picked from commit eeaef556c2)
- Add another selector to the list, which corresponds to the container
of the archive buttons on the release page of an repository.
- Seems like that 8d2b764607 missed
another case.
- Resolves #3180
(cherry picked from commit 39c3295f68)
Fix https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/30428
---
Conflict resolution: trivial and move test to own subtest run directly
after `Normal`.
(cherrypicked commit 9466fec879f4f2c88c7c1e7a5cffba319282ab66)
(cherry picked from commit db39b8f4a7)
Backport #30392 by @jam7
This patch improves the migration from gitbucket to gitea.
The gitbucket uses it's own internal perPage value (= 25) for paging and
ignore per_page arguments in the requested URL. This cause gitea to
migrate only 25 issues and 25 PRs from gitbucket repository. This may
not happens on old gitbucket. But recent gitbucket 4.40 or 4.38.4 has
this problem.
This patch change to use this internally hardcoded perPage of gitbucket
as gitea's maxPerPage numer when migrating from gitbucket. There are
several perPage values in gitbucket like 25 for Isseus/PRs and 10 for
Releases. Some of those API doesn't support paging yet. It sounds
difficult to implement, but using the minimum number among them worked
out very well. So, I use 10 in this patch.
Brief descriptions of problems and this patch are also available in
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/30316.
In addition, I'm not sure what kind of test cases are possible to write
here. It's a test for migration, so it requires testing gitbucket server
and gitea server, I guess. Please let me know if it is possible to write
such test cases here. Thanks!
Co-authored-by: Kazushi (Jam) Marukawa <jam@pobox.com>
(cherry picked from commit b941d7485b53e5dd093a1cce3c9ff47c91d4fc58)
Backport #30357 by @yp05327
When repo is a mirror, and commit author is an external user, then
`GetUserByEmail` will return error.
reproduce/test:
- mirror Gitea to your instance
- disable action and enable it again, this will trigger
`DetectAndHandleSchedules`
ps: also follow #24706, it only fixed normal runs, not scheduled runs.
Co-authored-by: yp05327 <576951401@qq.com>
(cherry picked from commit 69cc79173ddbf7662c4d7246b6161b9351038d16)
Backport #30372 by @silverwind
Fixes https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/30353.
I don't know what causes `code-inner` to not inherit `line-height` from
its direct parent `.lines-code` but instead from grandparent `.markup`
even thought MDN tells me it's
[inherited](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/line-height#formal_definition).
This causes no negative impact on other code views, so I think it's the
best solution.
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
(cherry picked from commit 88b3d192a0663bd5f25ffa07af45179bac755150)
Backport #30382 by @wolfogre
Fix regression of #30331.
```txt
time="2024-04-10T02:23:49Z" level=error msg="failed to fetch task" func="[fetchTask]" file="[poller.go:91]" error="unknown: rpc error: code = Internal desc = pick task: CreateTaskForRunner: Error 1052 (23000): Column 'id' in field list is ambiguous"
```
I have tested it in my local env, and it should work now.
Co-authored-by: Jason Song <i@wolfogre.com>
(cherry picked from commit 189cfc1be1015367ca20c655ab6a5fd9847c527f)
Backport #30331 by @yp05327
Fix #30243
We only checking unit disabled when detecting workflows, but not in
runner `FetchTask`.
So if a workflow was detected when action unit is enabled, but disabled
later, `FetchTask` will still return these detected actions.
Global setting: repo.ENABLED and repository.`DISABLED_REPO_UNITS` will
not effect this.
Co-authored-by: yp05327 <576951401@qq.com>
(cherry picked from commit 52bdeb4d45d44756e28dda7f3f899bb57eed1aad)
Backport #30309 by @silverwind
Fix the action issue in https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/30303,
specifically:
- Use opaque step header hover background to avoid transparency issue
- Un-sticky the `action-view-left` on mobile, it would otherwise overlap
into right view
- Improve commit summary, let it wrap
- Fix and comment z-indexes
- Tweak width for run-list-item-right so it wastes less space on desktop
- Synced latest changes to console colors from dark to light theme
<img width="467" alt="Screenshot 2024-04-06 at 18 58 15"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/115237/8ad26b72-6cd9-4522-8ad1-6fd86b2d0d53">
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
(cherry picked from commit 10d83ae6435134177253569a2f244935c2bb708c)
`log.Xxx("%v")` is not ideal, this PR adds necessary context messages.
Remove some unnecessary logs.
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
(cherry picked from commit 83f83019ef3471b847a300f0821499b3896ec987)
Conflicts:
- modules/util/util.go
Conflict resolved by picking `util.Iif` from 654cfd1dfbd3f3f1d94addee50b6fe2b018a49c3
(cherry picked from commit 492d116b2a468991f44d6d37ec33f918ccbe4514)
Conflicts:
modules/util/util.go
trivial context conflict as the commit is picked from https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/3212
The user that caused the notification to re-evaluates the
schedules is not the one that will trigger the workflows. They are
background tasks that are authored by the action user (id -2).
Such a mis-assignment is problematic when the user that caused the
notification is deleted.
Fixes: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/3211
(cherry picked from commit c3e2c25359)
