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)
