(cherry picked from commit 20b5669269)
(cherry picked from commit 1574643a6a)
Update semantic version according to specification
(cherry picked from commit 22510f4130)
Mise à jour de 'Makefile'
(cherry picked from commit c3d85d8409)
(cherry picked from commit 5ea2309851)
(cherry picked from commit ec5217b9d1)
(cherry picked from commit 14f08e364b)
(cherry picked from commit b4465c67b8)
[API] [SEMVER] replace number with version
(cherry picked from commit fba48e6497)
(cherry picked from commit 532ec5d878)
[API] [SEMVER] [v1.20] less is replaced by css
(cherry picked from commit 01ca3a4f42)
(cherry picked from commit 1d928c3ab2)
(cherry picked from commit a39dc804cd)
Conflicts:
webpack.config.js
(cherry picked from commit adc68578b3)
Close #24108
Use secondary pointing menu for tabs on user/organization home page so
the tabs look the same.
Main changes:
1. modified a part of dom structure in
`templates/user/overview/header.tmpl` to make it the same as
`templates/org/header.tmpl` in order to produce the same ui.
2. Move some css to `web_src/css/shared/repoorgshared.css` to make them
shareable between `templates/user/overview/header.tmpl` and
`templates/org/header.tmpl`
After:
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17645053/232400617-2add5bec-d483-4ab1-b48d-eaee157f7b09.mov
For further improvements. Need some thoughts:
For [this
TODO](729ad294cb/templates/user/overview/header.tmpl (L1)),
it is viable to make it a shared template for [this
part](729ad294cb/templates/user/overview/header.tmpl (L2-L17))
and [this
part](729ad294cb/templates/org/header.tmpl (L1-L16))
because they are the same except for the variable. But for the menu
parts, they are quite different so might not be suitable to use a shared
template. So need some thoughts and advice about extracting the shared
template from these two headers.
---------
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Close #24195
Some of the changes are taken from my another fix
f07b0de997
in #20147 (although that PR was discarded ....)
The bug is:
1. The old code doesn't handle `removedfile` event correctly
2. The old code doesn't provide attachments for type=CommentTypeReview
This PR doesn't intend to refactor the "upload" code to a perfect state
(to avoid making the review difficult), so some legacy styles are kept.
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Close: #23738
The actual cause of `500 Internal Server Error` in the issue is not what
is descirbed in the issue.
The actual cause is that after deleting team, if there is a PR which has
requested reivew from the deleted team, the comment could not match with
the deleted team by `assgin_team_id`. So the value of `.AssigneeTeam`
(see below code block) is `nil` which cause `500 error`.
1c8bc4081a/templates/repo/issue/view_content/comments.tmpl (L691-L695)
To fix this bug, there are the following problems to be resolved:
- [x] 1. ~~Stroe the name of the team in `content` column when inserting
`comment` into DB in case that we cannot get the name of team after it
is deleted. But for comments that already exist, just display "Unknown
Team"~~ Just display "Ghost Team" in the comment if the assgined team is
deleted.
- [x] 2. Delete the PR&team binding (the row of which `review_team_id =
${team_id} ` in table `review`) when deleting team.
- [x] 3.For already exist and undeleted binding rows in in table
`review`, ~~we can delete these rows when executing migrations.~~ they
do not affect the function, so won't delete them.
Add a new badge to the repository tab for users and organizations.
The badge is only visible if a repo exists.
Change the badge color of existing "Starred Repositories". (from primary to small)
Closes #24188
Close #7570
1. Clearly define the wiki path behaviors, see
`services/wiki/wiki_path.go` and tests
2. Keep compatibility with old contents
3. Allow to use dashes in titles, eg: "2000-01-02 Meeting record"
4. Add a "Pages" link in the dropdown, otherwise users can't go to the
Pages page easily.
5. Add a "View original git file" link in the Pages list, even if some
file names are broken, users still have a chance to edit or remove it,
without cloning the wiki repo to local.
6. Fix 500 error when the name contains prefix spaces.
This PR also introduces the ability to support sub-directories, but it
can't be done at the moment due to there are a lot of legacy wiki data,
which use "%2F" in file names.
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
The old code has a lot of technical debts, eg: `repo/wiki/view.tmpl` /
`Iterate`
This PR improves the Wiki TOC display and improves the code.
---------
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
1. Remove unnecessary `btn-link` `muted` classes
* Link is link, button is button, I can't see a real requirement to make
a button like a link.
* If anyone insists, please help to show me real example from modern
frameworks / websites, how and why they do so.
* No need to duplicate a lot of class names on similar elements
* Declare styles clearly, for example, `markdown-toolbar` itself should
have `display: flex`, but not use `gt-df` to overwrite the `display:
block`.
2. Remove unnecessary `role` attribute
* https://github.com/github/markdown-toolbar-element/issues/70
* The `markdown-toolbar-element` does want to add `role=button`, but
there is a bug.
* So we do the similar thing as upstream does (add the role by JS),
until they fix their bugs.
3. Indent `markdown-switch-easymde` (before it doesn't have a proper
indent)
Screenshot:
Followup of #23876 according to my unreleased review demanding tooltips.
Additionally
- add a `muted` equivalent for buttons
- convert `switch to legacy` to an actual button
- enroll `switch to legacy` in the builtin pseudo focus cycle
- remove spaces between the buttons
The effect of the `muted` class is what you would expect: The button
loses all of its normal styling, and is defined only by its content instead.
This will help reduce a11y infractions in the future, as that was one of
the major points why people didn't use `<button>` tags and decided on a
bad fix (i.e. through `<div>`s) instead.
## Appearance
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
- Add placeholders and aria-label all input fields on these two pages
- Add margin before wiki change message
- Remove labels from release page, replacing them with aria-label
The completion popup now behaves now much more as expected than before
for the raw textarea:
- You can press <kbd>Tab</kbd> or <kbd>Enter</kbd> once the completion
popup is open to accept the selected item
- The menu does not close automatically when moving the cursor
- When you delete text, previously correct suggestions are shown again
- If you delete all text until the opening char (`@` or `:`) after
applying a suggestion, the popup reappears again
- Menu UI has been improved
<img width="278" alt="Screenshot 2023-04-07 at 19 43 42"
src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/115237/230653601-d6517b9f-0988-445e-aa57-5ebfaf5039f3.png">
…; add trailing slash to PyPI repository URL (in accordance to PEP-503)
This should solve Issue #23980, by moving the space in front of the
package name and the package name out of the `gitea-origin-url` block.
It also adds a trailing slash to the PyPI repository URL in accordance
to [Python PEP-503](https://peps.python.org/pep-0503/).
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
I've heard many reports of users getting scared when they see their own
email address for their own profile, as they believe that the email
field is also visible to other users. Currently, using Incognito mode
or going over the Settings is the only "reasonable" way to verify this
from the perspective of the user.
A locked padlock should be enough to indicate that the email is not
visible to anyone apart from the user and the admins. An unlocked
padlock is used if the email address is only shown to authenticated
users.
Some additional string-related changes in the Settings were introduced
as well to ensure consistency, and the comments in the relevant tests
were improved so as to allow for easier modifications in the future.
---
#### Screenshot (EDIT: Scroll down for more up-to-date screenshots)
***Please remove this section before merging.***
This lock should only appear if the email address is explicitly hidden
using the `Hide Email Address` setting. The change was originally tested
on top of and designed for the Forgejo fork, but I don't expect any
problems to arise from this and I don't think that a
documentation-related change is strictly necessary.
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
One of the steps in #23328
Before there were 3 different but similar functions: dict/Dict/mergeinto
The code was just copied & pasted, no test.
This PR defines a new stable `dict` function, it covers all the 3 old
functions behaviors, only +160 -171
Future developers do not need to think about or guess the different dict
functions, just use one: `dict`
Why use `dict` but not `Dict`? Because there are far more `dict` than
`Dict` in code already ......
One of the proposals in #23328
This PR introduces a simple expression calculator
(templates/eval/eval.go), it can do basic expression calculations.
Many untested template helper functions like `Mul` `Add` can be replaced
by this new approach.
Then these `Add` / `Mul` / `percentage` / `Subtract` / `DiffStatsWidth`
could all use this `Eval`.
And it provides enhancements for Golang templates, and improves
readability.
Some examples:
----
* Before: `{{Add (Mul $glyph.Row 12) 12}}`
* After: `{{Eval $glyph.Row "*" 12 "+" 12}}`
----
* Before: `{{if lt (Add $i 1) (len $.Topics)}}`
* After: `{{if Eval $i "+" 1 "<" (len $.Topics)}}`
## FAQ
### Why not use an existing expression package?
We need a highly customized expression engine:
* do the calculation on the fly, without pre-compiling
* deal with int/int64/float64 types, to make the result could be used in
Golang template.
* make the syntax could be used in the Golang template directly
* do not introduce too much complex or strange syntax, we just need a
simple calculator.
* it needs to strictly follow Golang template's behavior, for example,
Golang template treats all non-zero values as truth, but many 3rd
packages don't do so.
### What's the benefit?
* Developers don't need to add more `Add`/`Mul`/`Sub`-like functions,
they were getting more and more.
Now, only one `Eval` is enough for all cases.
* The new code reads better than old `{{Add (Mul $glyph.Row 12) 12}}`,
the old one isn't familiar to most procedural programming developers
(eg, the Golang expression syntax).
* The `Eval` is fully covered by tests, many old `Add`/`Mul`-like
functions were never tested.
### The performance?
It doesn't use `reflect`, it doesn't need to parse or compile when used
in Golang template, the performance is as fast as native Go template.
### Is it too complex? Could it be unstable?
The expression calculator program is a common homework for computer
science students, and it's widely used as a teaching and practicing
purpose for developers. The algorithm is pretty well-known.
The behavior can be clearly defined, it is stable.
