If user has reached the maximum limit of repositories:
- Before
- disallow create
- allow fork without limit
- This patch:
- disallow create
- disallow fork
- Add option `ALLOW_FORK_WITHOUT_MAXIMUM_LIMIT` (Default **true**) :
enable this allow user fork repositories without maximum number limit
fixed https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/21847
Signed-off-by: Xinyu Zhou <i@sourcehut.net>
Some dbs require that all tables have primary keys, see
- #16802
- #21086
We can add a test to keep it from being broken again.
Edit:
~Added missing primary key for `ForeignReference`~ Dropped the
`ForeignReference` table to satisfy the check, so it closes #21086.
More context can be found in comments.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: zeripath <art27@cantab.net>
The recent PR adding orphaned checks to the LFS storage is not
sufficient to completely GC LFS, as it is possible for LFSMetaObjects to
remain associated with repos but still need to be garbage collected.
Imagine a situation where a branch is uploaded containing LFS files but
that branch is later completely deleted. The LFSMetaObjects will remain
associated with the Repository but the Repository will no longer contain
any pointers to the object.
This PR adds a second doctor command to perform a full GC.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
depends on #22094
Fixes https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/77
The old logic did not consider `is_internal`.
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: techknowlogick <techknowlogick@gitea.io>
Close #14601
Fix #3690
Revive of #14601.
Updated to current code, cleanup and added more read/write checks.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Signed-off-by: Andre Bruch <ab@andrebruch.com>
Co-authored-by: zeripath <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: Norwin <git@nroo.de>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Fix #22023
I've changed how the percentages for the language statistics are rounded
because they did not always add up to 100%
Now it's done with the largest remainder method, which makes sure that
total is 100%
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
When deleting a closed issue, we should update both `NumIssues`and
`NumClosedIssues`, or `NumOpenIssues`(`= NumIssues -NumClosedIssues`)
will be wrong. It's the same for pull requests.
Releated to #21557.
Alse fixed two harmless problems:
- The SQL to check issue/PR total numbers is wrong, that means it will
update the numbers even if they are correct.
- Replace legacy `num_issues = num_issues + 1` operations with
`UpdateRepoIssueNumbers`.
When getting tracked times out of the db and loading their attributes
handle not exist errors in a nicer way. (Also prevent an NPE.)
Fix #22006
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
`hex.EncodeToString` has better performance than `fmt.Sprintf("%x",
[]byte)`, we should use it as much as possible.
I'm not an extreme fan of performance, so I think there are some
exceptions:
- `fmt.Sprintf("%x", func(...)[N]byte())`
- We can't slice the function return value directly, and it's not worth
adding lines.
```diff
func A()[20]byte { ... }
- a := fmt.Sprintf("%x", A())
- a := hex.EncodeToString(A()[:]) // invalid
+ tmp := A()
+ a := hex.EncodeToString(tmp[:])
```
- `fmt.Sprintf("%X", []byte)`
- `strings.ToUpper(hex.EncodeToString(bytes))` has even worse
performance.
Change all license headers to comply with REUSE specification.
Fix #16132
Co-authored-by: flynnnnnnnnnn <flynnnnnnnnnn@github>
Co-authored-by: John Olheiser <john.olheiser@gmail.com>
Committer avatar rendered by `func AvatarByEmail` are not vertical align
as `func Avatar` does.
- Replace literals `ui avatar` and `ui avatar vm` with the constant
`DefaultAvatarClass`
When re-retrieving hook tasks from the DB double check if they have not
been delivered in the meantime. Further ensure that tasks are marked as
delivered when they are being delivered.
In addition:
* Improve the error reporting and make sure that the webhook task
population script runs in a separate goroutine.
* Only get hook task IDs out of the DB instead of the whole task when
repopulating the queue
* When repopulating the queue make the DB request paged
Ref #17940
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Unfortunately #21549 changed the name of Testcases without changing
their associated fixture directories.
Fix #21854
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
This PR adds a context parameter to a bunch of methods. Some helper
`xxxCtx()` methods got replaced with the normal name now.
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
- It's possible that the `user_redirect` table contains a user id that
no longer exists.
- Delete a user redirect upon deleting the user.
- Add a check for these dangling user redirects to check-db-consistency.
The doctor check `storages` currently only checks the attachment
storage. This PR adds some basic garbage collection functionality for
the other types of storage.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Fix #19513
This PR introduce a new db method `InTransaction(context.Context)`,
and also builtin check on `db.TxContext` and `db.WithTx`.
There is also a new method `db.AutoTx` has been introduced but could be used by other PRs.
`WithTx` will always open a new transaction, if a transaction exist in context, return an error.
`AutoTx` will try to open a new transaction if no transaction exist in context.
That means it will always enter a transaction if there is no error.
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Related #20471
This PR adds global quota limits for the package registry. Settings for
individual users/orgs can be added in a seperate PR using the settings
table.
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Close https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/21640
Before: Gitea can create users like ".xxx" or "x..y", which is not
ideal, it's already a consensus that dot filenames have special
meanings, and `a..b` is a confusing name when doing cross repo compare.
After: stricter
Co-authored-by: Jason Song <i@wolfogre.com>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
_This is a different approach to #20267, I took the liberty of adapting
some parts, see below_
## Context
In some cases, a weebhook endpoint requires some kind of authentication.
The usual way is by sending a static `Authorization` header, with a
given token. For instance:
- Matrix expects a `Bearer <token>` (already implemented, by storing the
header cleartext in the metadata - which is buggy on retry #19872)
- TeamCity #18667
- Gitea instances #20267
- SourceHut https://man.sr.ht/graphql.md#authentication-strategies (this
is my actual personal need :)
## Proposed solution
Add a dedicated encrypt column to the webhook table (instead of storing
it as meta as proposed in #20267), so that it gets available for all
present and future hook types (especially the custom ones #19307).
This would also solve the buggy matrix retry #19872.
As a first step, I would recommend focusing on the backend logic and
improve the frontend at a later stage. For now the UI is a simple
`Authorization` field (which could be later customized with `Bearer` and
`Basic` switches):
The header name is hard-coded, since I couldn't fine any usecase
justifying otherwise.
## Questions
- What do you think of this approach? @justusbunsi @Gusted @silverwind
- ~~How are the migrations generated? Do I have to manually create a new
file, or is there a command for that?~~
- ~~I started adding it to the API: should I complete it or should I
drop it? (I don't know how much the API is actually used)~~
## Done as well:
- add a migration for the existing matrix webhooks and remove the
`Authorization` logic there
_Closes #19872_
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <williamzijl7@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
I found myself wondering whether a PR I scheduled for automerge was
actually merged. It was, but I didn't receive a mail notification for it
- that makes sense considering I am the doer and usually don't want to
receive such notifications. But ideally I want to receive a notification
when a PR was merged because I scheduled it for automerge.
This PR implements exactly that.
The implementation works, but I wonder if there's a way to avoid passing
the "This PR was automerged" state down so much. I tried solving this
via the database (checking if there's an automerge scheduled for this PR
when sending the notification) but that did not work reliably, probably
because sending the notification happens async and the entry might have
already been deleted. My implementation might be the most
straightforward but maybe not the most elegant.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
The OAuth spec [defines two types of
client](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-2.1),
confidential and public. Previously Gitea assumed all clients to be
confidential.
> OAuth defines two client types, based on their ability to authenticate
securely with the authorization server (i.e., ability to
> maintain the confidentiality of their client credentials):
>
> confidential
> Clients capable of maintaining the confidentiality of their
credentials (e.g., client implemented on a secure server with
> restricted access to the client credentials), or capable of secure
client authentication using other means.
>
> **public
> Clients incapable of maintaining the confidentiality of their
credentials (e.g., clients executing on the device used by the resource
owner, such as an installed native application or a web browser-based
application), and incapable of secure client authentication via any
other means.**
>
> The client type designation is based on the authorization server's
definition of secure authentication and its acceptable exposure levels
of client credentials. The authorization server SHOULD NOT make
assumptions about the client type.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8252#section-8.4
> Authorization servers MUST record the client type in the client
registration details in order to identify and process requests
accordingly.
Require PKCE for public clients:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8252#section-8.1
> Authorization servers SHOULD reject authorization requests from native
apps that don't use PKCE by returning an error message
Fixes #21299
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
