brand/main
2254
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 AverageHelperand0ko
|
408572dd35 |
feat: in-browser validation of website URLs for user, repository, and organization profiles (#12991)
This PR pertains to the client-side validation of the Website input on user, repo, and org profiles. #12962 extends `[service].VALID_SITE_URL_SCHEMES` to cover Website fields on repo and org profiles, where before that config key only applied to the one on user profiles. If that change merges, it will then be possible to construct an HTML [`pattern`](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/Elements/input#pattern) attribute for general use on any Website form input that the server validates this way, thus enabling browsers to catch errors early relating to URL scheme confusion. This PR (1) introduces such a `pattern` attribute, and (2) adds a new UI note to make clear to users which URL schemes are permitted. This change helps explain the browser's otherwise cryptic error messages regarding pattern mismatch, while also letting users know what URI schemes the Forgejo instance supports as Website links (e.g. gemini:// URLs).  This MUST NOT merge before #12962. To do so would introduce a regression wherein the UI may suggest and validate a different set of allowed URL schemes than the server actually permits. See also #5519 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12991 Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
AverageHelperand0ko
|
0e283c5485 |
feat: apply service.VALID_SITE_URL_SCHEMES to apply to repository and organization profiles (#12962)
Turns out this was a one-line fix for each affected field (change the binding from `ValidUrl` to `ValidSiteUrl`), but the tests are rather verbose. The tests are, however, each a simple flow of Create Thing > Try HTTP Website > Try Different Website (notice failure) > Try Different Website With New Config (notice success). I wrote this PR by adding failing tests first, then making the change, for each affected field. Not sure if this should be "feat:" or "fix:" tbh. I figured "fix:" for this PR since IMO the expected behavior is for `VALID_SITE_URL_SCHEMES` to apply in each of these cases, not only for user profiles via the UI form. (Later changed to "feat:" at @limiting-factor's suggestion, based on the observation that this change extends documented behavior.) This PR deals with the server-side validation only. #12991 covers client-side validation (deriving a `pattern` attribute from `VALID_SITE_URL_SCHEMES`, etc.) Closes #5519 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12962 Reviewed-by: limiting-factor <limiting-factor@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
|
c956dae73d |
feat: adds option to force overwrite new branch for /contents route (#12663)
Adds an option "force_overwrite_new_branch" when posting to
/repos/{owner}/{repo}/contents to modify multiple files in a repository.
When user provides both "branch" and "new_branch" options, and
"new_branch" already exists, the "force_overwrite_new_branch" option
allows the user to overwrite the existing branch. Under the hood this
amounts to a "git push --force".
[Issue #12600](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/12600)
### Tests for Go changes
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I ran...
- [x] `make pr-go` before pushing
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [ ] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
- [x] API swagger docs updated
### Release notes
- [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change.
- [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change.
Co-authored-by: Rob Gonnella <rob.gonnella@papayapay.com>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12663
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
|
||
|
oliverpoolandMathieu Fenniak
|
b1b47e64d7 |
fix(doctor): ensure the doctor runs with the same settings.AppPath as Forgejo (#12901)
Attempt to address #11705 and #11028. The docker container runs gitea by default: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/commit/1d1215108681790f3333a19cf2b03a03b5df48ae/docker/root/etc/s6/gitea/run Whereas a user might run `forgejo doctor ...` (which is symlinked to gitea). So the doctor expects a different value for the authorized_keys command. This fix does the opposite of syncAppConfForGit: it fetches the `AppPath` from the database to ensure it is the same as forgejo: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/commit/1d1215108681790f3333a19cf2b03a03b5df48ae/routers/init.go#L76-L87 ### Testing 1. Make a symlink called `forgejo`, pointing to gitea `ln -s gitea forgejo` 2. Run `./gitea` and add a ssh key to a user 3. Stop `./gitea` 4. Run `./forgejo doctor check --run authorized-keys` Without this fix, the last command should fail. With the fix, the last command should succeed and print: ``` - [I] AppPath changed from '/home/forgejo/forgejo' to '/home/forgejo/gitea' ``` - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. *The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.* The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12901 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
CloudsandGusted
|
044f3d95b6 |
chore: re-enable nilnil lint for models/actions/task.go (#12768)
I added sentinel error values for jobs not being found and no jobs being updated by the `CreateTaskForRunner` function. This avoids the nilnil antipattern and allows the nilnil lint to be enabled for the `models/actions/task.go` file again. The handling of these new errors was added to the `PickTask` function in `services/actions/task.go`. Related issue: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/11261 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12768 Reviewed-by: limiting-factor <limiting-factor@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: elle <0xllx0@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
steven.guiheuxandMathieu Fenniak
|
6a27eb051d |
feat(api,ui): add multiline comment on pullrequest (#12582)
Closes https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/6093 This PR adds support for **multi-line review comments** on pull requests, allowing reviewers to select a range of lines in diffs instead of only a single line — similar to GitHub's implementation. ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [X] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [X] `make pr-go` before pushing Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12582 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Gustedand0ko
|
f576a1a21e |
feat: remove no-transform in Cache-Control header. (#12905)
First, why was this header here in the first place? Cloudflare! Cloudflare had a optimization setting called "auto-minfy" and would minify HTML,JS,CSS - this included removing extra whitespaces from `<code>` elements. That's a problem because files are shown per-line with a `<code>` element and thus results in indentation being completely gone. Gitea added a FAQ entry for this [1], but on the same day decided to add the workaround in Gitea, the `no-transform` header [2]. I can't find a reference of this option and some posts suggests it's been removed. Thus it no longer serves a need to be present in Forgejo. That wasn't my intentional motivation to remove this. This header is also causing that HAProxy will not compress responses [3] from Forgejo which is not ideal for Codeberg, this behavior cannot be turned off or be worked around. Potential risk, some other CDN or some other Cloudflare option might still do this removal of whitespace in `<code>` HTML tags, it seems better to disable the feature than to have Forgejo add a header which is also causing other side-effects. I'm not aware of this another CDN of Cloudflare option so I don't want to mark it as breaking. [1]: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/20430 [2]: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/20432 [3]: https://docs.haproxy.org/3.3/configuration.html#:~:text=the%20response%20contains%20the%20%22no-transform%22%20value%20in%20the%20%22Cache-control%22%20%20%20%20%20header Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12905 Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
1ad2164948 |
chore: add more error output for an invalid JWT key identifier (#12903)
`TestAPIAuthWithAuthorizedIntegration` has [occasionally failed](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/actions/runs/166572/jobs/8/attempt/1#jobstep-4-2101) in the integration test steps with the unexpected output `authorized integration: parse JWT error: token is unverifiable: error while executing keyfunc: no key identified`. This indicates that the authorized integration being tested was fully validated until the JWT signature, but the signature was not accessible from the JWKS remote, which is hosted within the integration test. This doesn't seem to make sense to me. This PR extends "no key identified" to indicate what key came from the JWT, and what keys were present in the JWKS file, so that I can see why they're not matching. This information could be generally useful in a 401 error when trying to understand authorized integration failures and doesn't pose a security risk as the keys are public information. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [ ] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [ ] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [x] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12903 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
|
5b7bcf042c |
fix: make email token extraction case-insensitive (#12460)
Resolves forgejo/forgejo#12436 Uppercase the token before verification as verification is case-sensitive. Some mail clients might've lower cased. Co-authored-by: Abidos <abdullah.sowilah@gmail.com> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12460 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Antonin DelpeuchandGusted
|
2f0f42272c |
fix: re-uploading the same avatar doesn't delete it (#12823)
Fixes #12822. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12823 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
zachhandleyandMathieu Fenniak
|
64bce47672 |
feat(api): expose action job + run logs via REST (#12666)
Closes #11859 🙂 Wanted to be able to grab action logs from my homelab dashboard without juggling session cookies. Two endpoints so scripts and webhooks can pull logs without scraping the rendered UI: - `GET /repos/{owner}/{repo}/actions/jobs/{job_id}/logs` returns plaintext for a single job's latest task. The underlying reader is `io.ReadSeekCloser`, so passing it through `http.ServeContent` gives you HTTP `Range:` for free. - `GET /repos/{owner}/{repo}/actions/runs/{run_id}/logs` streams a zip of every job's logs in the run. If a job hasn't started (`TaskID == 0`), its log expired, or opening the log file fails, the zip gets a `.MISSING` placeholder entry rather than bailing on the whole archive. Both endpoints get `reqToken()` per-route. Logs can have secrets accidentally echoed into them, so I wanted auth required even though the outer `/repos` group's `tokenRequiresScopes(AccessTokenScopeCategoryRepository)` already covers scope. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. (`tests/integration/api_actions_job_logs_test.go`, `tests/integration/api_actions_run_logs_test.go`) - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. (The new endpoints are covered by the regenerated swagger spec in this PR; `docs/user/api-usage.md` is general auth/usage guidance and doesn't need changes. Happy to open a docs PR if reviewers prefer.) ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Release note added as `release-notes/12666.md`. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12666 Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Andreas AhlenstorfandMathieu Fenniak
|
9b9457582a |
fix: keep run in sync when rerunning individual jobs (#12818)
When an individual job is rerun, the run it belongs to has to be kept in sync. For example, the timestamps when the run was started and stopped have to be adjusted accordingly. That didn't happen since https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12141 because the functionality was accidentally omitted. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes (can be removed for JavaScript changes) - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Tests for JavaScript changes (can be removed for Go changes) - I added test coverage for JavaScript changes... - [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested. - [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)). ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [ ] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [x] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. *The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.* The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12818 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Andreas AhlenstorfandMathieu Fenniak
|
531a43a9a5 |
fix: cancel dependent jobs when rerunning jobs (#12756)
When a single Forgejo Actions job should be rerun, its dependent jobs (those that have the job to be rerun in their `needs:`) might still be running. That means they cannot be rerun. Currently, Forgejo ignores and simply skips them. But that is wrong: their outcome is meaningless at best and wrong at worst because it depends on an outdated attempt of the job to be rerun. This is remedied by cancelling them before queueing them for a rerun, too. Follow-up of https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12141. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12756 Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
de5f38c4ea |
feat: enable auth to raw resources, release downloads, & attachments via authorized integrations (#12776)
A handful of routes, described in this PR as "mixed routes", are currently accessible by both web-based sessions and authenticated API users. The goal of this PR is to allow access to these routes for Authorized Integrations as well, bringing them to full API compatibility (to my knowledge) with other authentication methods. These routes are impacted:
- `/{username}/{repo}/raw/*`
- `/{username}/{repo}/archive/*`
- `/{username}/{repo}/releases/download/{vTag}/{fileName}`
- `/{username}/{repo}/attachments/{uuid}`
- `/attachments/{uuid}`
The major work in this PR was to refactoring the existing authentication methods so that "path based matching" that they were currently doing was no longer required, as I didn't want to introduce that into Authorized Integrations. All the path based matching is removed in this PR, and authentication methods are enabled entirely by the middleware applied to their endpoints.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests for Go changes
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I ran...
- [x] `make pr-go` before pushing
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change.
- [x] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12776
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
|
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
cdd35458a9 |
feat: enable auth to git LFS via authorized integrations (#12725)
The goal is to enable access to Git LFS resources with Authorized Integrations JWTs. Blocker that needed to be resolved is that adding the `AuthorizedIntegration` auth method would conflict with the LFS tokens, which are handed out during git ssh clones to allow access to LFS resources -- `AuthorizedIntegration` would mark these as `AuthenticationAttemptedIncorrectCredential`, and therefore the requests would 401 before they got to the LFS-specific token validation routines. The fix is to move LFS token authentication into an authentication group so that it could be resolved at the same time as the authorized integration, rather than doing it inside the LFS server routines. Refactors for LFS tokens are covered by refreshed test automation. Authorized integrations LFS Access has been manually tested, and will be further covered in an end-to-end integration test (https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/end-to-end/pulls/1954). ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [ ] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [ ] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [x] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12725 Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
numenandGusted
|
427457946b |
feat(api): return created time in /org/{org} endpoint (#12633)
closes #4126 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12633 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Robert WolffandGusted
|
44b93ff7cc |
fix: do not migrate confidential issues and internal notes from Gitlab (#12735)
A dedicated test repository was added at https://gitlab.com/forgejo/test_repo-confidential with one "confidential issue" and two "internal notes". Closes: #12688 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12735 Reviewed-by: oliverpool <oliverpool@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
GustedandGusted
|
6c85dffb78 |
fix: load repo language for converting to api struct (#12737)
Load the primary language of the repository when it's converted to a API struct. This is simpler than adding `LoadAttributes` to a lot of places. Resolves forgejo/forgejo#12729 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12737 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
GustedandGusted
|
d25f7ae70d |
feat: show progress of issues and PRs migrations (#12738)
These are by the far the longest time spent on during a migration. Indicate the progress of how many issues and PRs were migrated so far. Don't overwhelm the messenger, so they are only updated once a batch is migrated. Which is "slow" enough to see it's not stuck and still doing work. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12738 Reviewed-by: Ellen Εμίλια Άννα Zscheile <fogti@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
dfdd9b2e2a |
fix: check quota in LFS uploads against the repository owner, not operating user (#12755)
Follow-up to the previously closed #12437; verifies git LFS quotas are checked against the repository owner not the current actor. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. <!--start release-notes-assistant--> ## Release notes <!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo--> - Bug fixes - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12755): <!--number 12755 --><!--line 0 --><!--description Y2hlY2sgcXVvdGEgaW4gTEZTIHVwbG9hZHMgYWdhaW5zdCB0aGUgcmVwb3NpdG9yeSBvd25lciwgbm90IG9wZXJhdGluZyB1c2Vy-->check quota in LFS uploads against the repository owner, not operating user<!--description--> <!--end release-notes-assistant--> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12755 Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
nightfurysl2001andMathieu Fenniak
|
b58d8e20fd |
feat: Update Microsoft Teams webhook to use AdaptiveCard (#11704)
## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes (can be removed for JavaScript changes) - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [ ] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Closes #4517 <!--start release-notes-assistant--> ## Release notes <!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo--> - Features - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/11704): <!--number 11704 --><!--line 0 --><!--description VXBkYXRlIE1pY3Jvc29mdCBUZWFtcyB3ZWJob29rIHRvIHVzZSBBZGFwdGl2ZUNhcmQ=-->Update Microsoft Teams webhook to use AdaptiveCard<!--description--> <!--end release-notes-assistant--> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/11704 Reviewed-by: oliverpool <oliverpool@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Andreas AhlenstorfandMathieu Fenniak
|
42618ba771 |
fix: update statuses in phases to prevent out of order updates from stalling workflows (#12685)
During workflow expansion, jobs are replaced or added. That means that their execution order does not necessarily match the order of their numeric IDs. For example, job 129 might depend on job 130. Unfortunately, Forgejo doesn't take this possibility into account and always examines and updates jobs by ascending ID. That means that while examining job 129, job 130 has still its old status, and, as a result, Forgejo won't schedule job 129 for execution because it's still waiting for job 130 to complete. This can lead to workflows getting stuck: ``` ...tions/job_emitter.go:48:jobEmitterQueueHandler() [E] checkJobsOfRun failed for RunID = 49: error in tryHandleIncompleteMatrix: jobStatusResolver attempted to tryHandleIncompleteMatrix for a job (id=129) with an incomplete 'needs' job (id=130) ``` This is caused by calculating all status changes recursively in memory before writing them to the database. For example, job A that was completed would unblock job B that depended on it. In that case, Forgejo would simultaneously mark job A as completed and B as waiting. However, that would not work if B had a lower ID than A. That is remedied by writing updates to the database before entering the next recursion. So, continuing the example, job A is marked as completed in the database before the next iteration detects that B is no longer blocked and writes that to the database. Resolves https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/12641. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes (can be removed for JavaScript changes) - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Tests for JavaScript changes (can be removed for Go changes) - I added test coverage for JavaScript changes... - [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested. - [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)). ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. *The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.* The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12685 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
numenandMathieu Fenniak
|
3650528262 |
fix: return API URL in the url field for pull requests using the API (#12643)
closes #10451 ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [ ] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. <!--start release-notes-assistant--> ## Release notes <!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo--> - Bug fixes - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12643): <!--number 12643 --><!--line 0 --><!--description cmV0dXJuIEFQSSBVUkwgaW4gdGhlIGB1cmxgIGZpZWxkIGZvciBwdWxsIHJlcXVlc3RzIHVzaW5nIHRoZSBBUEk=-->return API URL in the `url` field for pull requests using the API<!--description--> <!--end release-notes-assistant--> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12643 Reviewed-by: Robert Wolff <mahlzahn@posteo.de> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
hwiplandGusted
|
1ea5605eae |
feat: add dynamic group mappings for OIDC (#11656)
Currently, Forgejo supports configuring static group team mappings for
an OIDC authentication source that map OIDC groups to Forgejo
organizations and teams. For example, the following mapping
```json
{"Developer": {"MyForgejoOrganization": ["MyForgejoTeam1", "MyForgejoTeam2"]}}
```
automatically adds a user in the OIDC group `Developer` to the teams
`MyForgejoTeam1` and `MyForgejoTeam2` in organization
`MyForgejoOrganization`.
In order to support more dynamic mappings and to avoid having to update
the mappings for new organizations and teams, add an additional
configuration option that supports mappings with placeholders like in
the following example:
```json
["group-{org}-{team}", "other:{org}/{team}"]
```
In this example, the mappings add a user in OIDC groups
`group-org1-team1`, `group-org2-team2`, and `other:org3/team3` to team
`team1` in organization `org1`, team `team2` in organization `org2`, and
to team `team3` in organization `org3`.
Additionally, this adds a configuration option to dynamically remove
users from organization teams. If enabled, a user is removed from all
teams that are not added via a static or dynamic mapping. Thus, users
are only in teams that are added via such a mapping and no other teams.
Docs: forgejo/docs!1950
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/11656
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
|
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
29eddd311b |
chore: upgrade to https://code.forgejo.org/xorm/xorm v1.4.0 (#12639)
Upgrade Forgejo to our forked [xorm v1.4.0](https://code.forgejo.org/xorm/xorm/compare/v1.3.9-forgejo.12...v1.4.0), which is now named `code.forgejo.org/xorm/xorm` to reflect the current expectation that it is a permanent fork. A small number of API changes were made recently in https://code.forgejo.org/xorm/xorm/issues/120 which are accounted for in this PR, in addition to the module rename. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [ ] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [x] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12639 Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org> |
||
|
John BerthelsandMathieu Fenniak
|
08949c518a |
fix: expose API fields for ssh keys (#12517) (#12625)
The original issue only mentions 'Verified', but 'Updated' was also missing and so is also included. The integration test only covers the initial `false` state. Attempting to cover the flip to true seemed to introduce more problems than benefits (as outlined in `tests/integration/api_keys_test.go`) Manual testing was performed to check that verifying the key in the web ui caused the return value to change from false to true in the API response (using `curl`). ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes (can be removed for JavaScript changes) - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Tests for JavaScript changes (can be removed for Go changes) - I added test coverage for JavaScript changes... - [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested. - [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)). ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12625 Reviewed-by: Cyborus <cyborus@disroot.org> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
cf087a2f12 |
feat: ability to edit authorized integration in web UI (#12601)
Extends the UI introduced in #12558 to have edit capabilities. (not in scope: "Add" for a new Authorized Integration will be the next update to this UI; `create-authorized-integration` CLI is still the only way to create a new record) This PR includes a few refactoring steps. The goal of these steps is to have `services/auth` be a single entrypoint for validating, inserting, or updating an authorized integration. Some logic is moved out of `services/authz` because it is not authorization related, and some is moved out of `services/auth/method` to allow it to be reused during validation without creating a cyclical module dependency. This PR also adds comprehensive validation to the more complex fields in the authorized integration, such as the issuer and claim rules. This validation applies to the `forgejo admin user create-authorized-integration` CLI as well. The visible UI is the same as #12558, but with a "Save" button, and the ability to display errors:  ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Tests for JavaScript changes - I added test coverage for JavaScript changes... - [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested. - [x] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)). ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. - Documentation is on my TODO list and will be completed before release. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12601 Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Andreas AhlenstorfandMathieu Fenniak
|
8a1021e2a0 |
feat: mark skipped checks as skipped (#12606)
A separate commit status is introduced for skipped checks. That enables marking them as such in the UI instead of successful, which could be misleading. Resolves https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/10138. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes (can be removed for JavaScript changes) - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Tests for JavaScript changes (can be removed for Go changes) - I added test coverage for JavaScript changes... - [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested. - [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)). ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. *The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.* The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12606 Reviewed-by: Cyborus <cyborus@disroot.org> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Antonin DelpeuchandGusted
|
0a57672544 |
feat: serve downsized versions of avatars (#11242)
Fixes #2325. This introduces a way to download downsized versions of the user and repository avatars: * `/avatars/123abcd` still serves the full-size avatar * `/avatars/123abcd?size=64` serves it at size 64x64 px Those downsized versions are computed on demand when requested for the first time and cached. The caching is done in a storage location configurable in the instance settings, just like the storage locations for the full-sized avatars are. The sizes of the downsized images are restricted to a fixed set of sizes, so that the cache doesn't grow too big. The caching and resizing logic is exposed in a way that could potentially be reused for other types of images (such as user uploads in issue discussions). Luckily, the Go templates already specify in many places which size those avatars should be rendered, even if this information was only used for external avatar providers (such as Gravatar) until now. The range of sizes requested by the HTML templates is rather wide: the table below lists all the sizes I could find, and the corresponding size served by the backend with the logic I implemented. The scaling factor of 2 was already used for requesting resized external avatars, and likely exists to make sure that users with display scaling enabled get a sharper picture. | Size requested in the template | After scaling (x2) | Size of the image served | |---------|---------|---------| | 256 px | 512 px | original (512 px) | | 140 px | 280 px | original (512 px) | | 48 px | 96 px | 128 px | | 40 px | 80 px | 128 px | | 32 px | 64 px | 64 px | | 28 px | 56 px | 64 px | | 24 px | 48 px | 64 px | | 20 px | 40 px | 64 px | Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/11242 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
GustedandGusted
|
aae19e6c19 |
chore: tidy up uploading migration code (#12577)
- Validate and sanitize topics. - Cap topics at 25 (limit used elsewhere, now unified constant). - Add more details and rephrase common user-facing error messages. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12577 |
||
|
Erwan LeboucherandGusted
|
0211c1eace |
feat: persist OAuth2/OIDC sign-in via IdP re-validation (#12321)
The session cookie has no Max-Age, so it is lost when the browser closes. The password flow compensates via a "Remember me" checkbox issuing an LTA cookie; OAuth2/OIDC sign-in had no such UI. Issuing a regular LTA cookie after an OAuth callback would skip the IdP for LOGIN_REMEMBER_DAYS. Instead, this introduces a separate LongTermAuthorizationSSO purpose: the cookie is opt-in via the existing "Remember me" checkbox, and when presented without a session, autoSignIn redirects through the IdP with OIDC prompt=none for silent re-auth. On login_required / interaction_required / consent_required / account_selection_required we transparently fall back to interactive sign-in. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12321 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
2327b3b888 | feat: add 'ui' field to authorized_integration table | ||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
6e5dbfa169 |
fix: handle boolean workflow inputs correctly before jobparser evaluates with them (#12539)
Fixes https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/forgejo-actions-feature-requests/issues/112. Currently boolean `workflow_dispatch` values are being passed as strings during Forgejo's job parsing, causing both true & false to have the same behaviour when evaluated in a condition like this: ``` on: workflow_dispatch: inputs: win32: type: boolean jobs: job1: strategy: matrix: runner: ${{ fromJSON(inputs.win32 == 'true' && '["win32", "win64"]' || '["win64"]') }} steps: # ... ``` ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [ ] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12539 Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
|
32b8d732b8 |
2026-05-12 security patches (#12493)
- fix: prevent git write to wiki repo from unauthorized user via git HTTP - fix: prevent LFS authorization token from being used for read/write access after user's access is restricted from Forgejo - fix: prevent scoped API access (OAuth tokens, Access tokens) from accessing resources beyond their permitted scope via non-API endpoints (e.g. /user/repo/raw/...) - fix: implementing missing OAuth validation checks, improve protections against race conditions - fix: prevent OAuth redirect URI spoofing via non-ascii case collision - fix: strengthen Actions Artifact V4 signature algorithm against spoofing attacks <!--start release-notes-assistant--> ## Release notes <!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo--> - Security bug fixes - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12493): <!--number 12493 --><!--line 0 --><!--description MjAyNi0wNS0xMiBzZWN1cml0eSBwYXRjaGVz-->2026-05-12 security patches<!--description--> <!--end release-notes-assistant--> Co-authored-by: Derzsi Dániel <daniel@tohka.us> Co-authored-by: jvoisin <julien.voisin@dustri.org> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12493 |
||
|
Andreas AhlenstorfandMathieu Fenniak
|
753e289da5 |
fix: wipe run artifacts before rerun (#12523)
Forgejo Actions keeps one set of artifacts per workflow run -- those of the latest workflow run. If a particular workflow run is rerun, Forgejo is supposed to remove outdated artifacts. However, it does not do that. As a result, the user is presented a mix of outdated and new artifacts, even within the same archive.
This is remedied by wiping the artifacts before each rerun. The same happens when only one or more jobs are rerun, which also matches the behaviour of GitHub Actions. In the example below, when only rerunning `artifacts-two`, `many-artifacts-one` would disappear and a new version of `many-artifacts-two` would be made available.
Reproducer:
```yaml
on:
push:
jobs:
artifacts-one:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- run: mkdir -p artifacts-one
- run: |
if [[ "${{ github.run_attempt}}" == 1 ]] ; then echo "${{ github.run_attempt}}" > artifacts-one/ONE; fi
echo "${{ github.run_attempt}}" > artifacts-one/TWO
- uses: forgejo/upload-artifact@v4
with:
name: many-artifacts-one
path: artifacts-one/
artifacts-two:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- run: mkdir -p artifacts-two
- run: |
if [[ "${{ github.run_attempt}}" == 1 ]] ; then echo "${{ github.run_attempt}}" > artifacts-two/ONE; fi
echo "${{ github.run_attempt}}" > artifacts-two/TWO
- uses: forgejo/upload-artifact@v4
with:
name: many-artifacts-two
path: artifacts-two/
```
Resolves https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/12163.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests for Go changes
(can be removed for JavaScript changes)
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I ran...
- [x] `make pr-go` before pushing
### Tests for JavaScript changes
(can be removed for Go changes)
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change.
- [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change.
*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*
The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12523
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
|
||
|
Andreas AhlenstorfandMathieu Fenniak
|
03312e4f46 |
feat: make it possible to remove workflow runs (#12478)
Add the ability to remove workflow runs, either using the UI or the HTTP API. Workflow runs can only be removed once a workflow run has completed. For security reasons, only a repository administrator or a token with `write:repository` permissions can remove runs. Resolves https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2184. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes (can be removed for JavaScript changes) - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Tests for JavaScript changes (can be removed for Go changes) - I added test coverage for JavaScript changes... - [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested. - [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)). ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. *The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.* The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead. <!--start release-notes-assistant--> ## Release notes <!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo--> - Features - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12478): <!--number 12478 --><!--line 0 --><!--description bWFrZSBpdCBwb3NzaWJsZSB0byByZW1vdmUgd29ya2Zsb3cgcnVucw==-->make it possible to remove workflow runs<!--description--> <!--end release-notes-assistant--> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12478 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
e5eb5f8e63 |
feat: allow Authorized Integrations to have multiple values for a claim match (#12482)
Adds new Authorized Integration claim comparison rules for "in a list" and "in a list of globs", which would be required to permit multiple Forgejo Action events to match a JWT (per [design work](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/3571#issuecomment-14510514), [comment](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/3571#issuecomment-14512185)). ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [ ] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [x] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12482 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
famfoandGusted
|
169ea1d991 |
fix(activitypub): only return public activities on request (#12382)
The endpoint returning individual activities was missing access control checks, since IDs are sequential, this is not ideal. Fixes #12333 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12382 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
limiting-factorandMathieu Fenniak
|
508bb7f2ae |
fix: in actions_service cancelJobsForRun is bugous use killRun instead (#12366)
The cancelJobsForRun function is redundant with the killRun function and has bugs: - It does not use a transaction and may fail in a non-recoverable way - It does not update the commit status of the run - It does not set NeedRemoval to false if needed Remove the cancelJobsForRun function and use killRun instead (fixing forgejo/forgejo#12386). Both calls are covered by existing tests: - TestCancelPreviousJobs - TestCancelPreviousWithConcurrencyGroup A new integration test TestActionsPullRequestTrustPushCancel is added to verify that the NeedApproval field is set to false whenever a run is cancelled (fixing forgejo/forgejo#12350). Closes forgejo/forgejo#12350 Closes forgejo/forgejo#12386 --- Reverting the change fails the test at https://codeberg.org/limiting-factor/forgejo/src/commit/b6178e5634c230006a3c2b791ec8e06f09367e2d/tests/integration/actions_trust_test.go#L520-L533 with: ``` TAGS='sqlite sqlite_unlock_notify' make 'test-sqlite#TestActionsPullRequestTrustPushCancel' ... actions_trust_test.go:523: Error Trace: /home/limiting-factor/forgejo/tests/integration/actions_trust_test.go:523 /home/limiting-factor/forgejo/tests/integration/git_helper_for_declarative_test.go:98 /home/limiting-factor/forgejo/tests/integration/actions_trust_test.go:476 Error: Should be false Test: TestActionsPullRequestTrustPushCancel ``` ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes (can be removed for JavaScript changes) - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. <!--start release-notes-assistant--> ## Release notes <!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo--> - User Interface bug fixes - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12366): <!--number 12366 --><!--line 0 --><!--description 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-->When the author of a pull request is [denied the right to run Actions](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/user/actions/security-pull-request/) by clicking on the "Deny" button on the pull request trust management panel, the workflow runs created for all commits pushed to the pull request are cancelled. Before that, runs that were automatically cancelled because a newer commit was pushed to the pull request [were stuck in a state waiting for approval](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/12350).<!--description--> <!--end release-notes-assistant--> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12366 Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Andreas AhlenstorfandMathieu Fenniak
|
92863bb103 |
feat: expose run_id in ...actions/runners/jobs endpoint (#12480)
Include `run_id` in the responses emitted by all `...actions/runners/jobs` endpoints. Helps with correlating pending jobs with other jobs and the runs they belong to. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes (can be removed for JavaScript changes) - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Tests for JavaScript changes (can be removed for Go changes) - I added test coverage for JavaScript changes... - [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested. - [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)). ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. *The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.* The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12480 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Thanos ApolloandGusted
|
3a35c5353e |
feat: expose AGit topic branch in API PR head label (#12352)
For Agit-flow pull requests, `head.label` was explicitly set to an empty string. The head branch name (which contains the Agit topic, e.g. `user2/my-topic`) was already populated from `pr.HeadBranch` but then discarded. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12352 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: Cyborus <cyborus@disroot.org> |
||
|
Akashdeep DharandGusted
|
ffd10d37a6 |
fix: ensure moving all commits in a pull request for pagure migration (#12433)
While the changes were conveyed in the pull request in its entirety, the commit history of a pull request having more than one commit was bugged and the log would have shown just the presence of the most recent commit event, having the entire changes contained in a pull request. This is a problem that was mostly noticed in the closed pull request, so it is not as bad as it looks. Even then, if we are migrating closed pull requests, we should do it the right way. We do not want to retain these pull requests for archival purposes if they are not accurate. Signed-off-by: Akashdeep Dhar <akashdeep.dhar@gmail.com> Fixes https://forge.fedoraproject.org/forge/forge/issues/556 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12433 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
|
bf958fa355 |
fix: make package cleanup work again (#12446)
- Regression of forgejo/forgejo!11776 (and forgejo/forgejo!11881) - Scope of the transaction is moved to a per-package cleanup rule basis. This is also a enhancement for scaling (already deployed on Codeberg for a while). - Package cleanup is now run with `RetryTx`, because rebuilding repository files runs `RetryTx` and it could indicate to retry the whole transaction. - Previously it would error and say running `RetryTx` in a transaction was not possible, this is now possible. Nested `RetryTx` is always allowed, matching of which errors to retry is still the responsible of the inner `RetryTx`. Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12446 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
GustedandGusted
|
c07ea09050 |
fix: cleanup data before migration retry (#12370)
In the case you hit some API error (Github ratelimit was often a problem) or the instance restarted in the middle of your migration, you would be left with data on the disk and/or database. Upon retrying the migration the migration code would (rightfully) fail because it's trying to migrate stuff that already exists. This was hit so often on Codeberg it was better to force people to delete and start whole migration process again: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg-Infrastructure/forgejo/commit/28ee60c91f237268aa526086d0cce7a8f5380a9b Delete the repository data before retrying to solve this. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12370 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
c1ac671b55 |
feat: reusable workflow outer job is skipped if 'if:' block skips workflow (#12412)
Follow-up to https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner/pulls/1509 -- improves the UX in Forgejo when a reusable workflow is skipped, marking the workflow as skipped rather than succeeded. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12412 Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Mathieu FenniakandMathieu Fenniak
|
9b88e77c19 |
feat: expose immutable identifiers in Forgejo Actions JWTs (#12355)
Protect OIDC tokens generated by Forgejo Actions from threats arising when users or repositories are renamed or deleted, freeing their names up for reuse by another user. In this threat environment, relying on the name of users and repositories in validating JWT claims is unsafe because they can change. Adds three new claims to Actions' OIDC tokens: - `actor_id` -- the immutable identifier of the actor who triggered an Action run - `repository_id` -- the immutable identifier of the repository on which the Action is running - `repository_owner_id` -- the immutable identifier of the owner of the repository on which the Action is running Repositories will change their subject (`sub`) OIDC claims to include these immutable identifiers. Existing repositories will not change, in order to maintain compatibility with existing JWT usage. The new format will be applied to new repositories, or can be applied by disabling and enabling the Actions unit. The new format embeds the identifiers: - **Existing repos:** `repo:my-org/my-repo:ref:refs/heads/main` - **New repos:** `repo:my-org-123456/my-repo-456789:ref:refs/heads/main` Fixes #12244. ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [x] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - New fields will be added to documentation soon. - [ ] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12355 Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
steven.guiheuxandMathieu Fenniak
|
7e205c5718 |
fix: get tag must return the tag signature instead of commit signature (#12351)
## Fix: `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/git/tags/{sha}` returns empty verification for signed tags
### Problem
When an annotated tag is signed (GPG or SSH) but the underlying commit is **not** signed, the API endpoint `GET /repos/{owner}/{repo}/git/tags/{sha}` returns an empty `verification.signature` field.
This is because `ToAnnotatedTag` was calling `ToVerification(ctx, c)` with the **commit** object, which checks the commit's signature — not the tag's own signature. Since the commit is unsigned, the API returns `signature: ""` and `verified: false`.
This causes issues for tools that rely on the tag signature from the API to validate that a tag push event is from a trusted source.
### Fix
`ToAnnotatedTag` now checks if the tag has its own signature (`t.Signature != nil`). If so, it uses `ParseTagWithSignature` to verify the tag's signature and populates the `verification` field from the tag. Otherwise, it falls back to the commit signature (existing behavior for unsigned/lightweight tags).
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12351
Reviewed-by: limiting-factor <limiting-factor@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
|
||
|
Thomas TeixeiraandGusted
|
731334e973 |
fix(web): org projects assignment in issue view (#7999)
Allows user to assign organization projects to their new issues, using the project sidebar selector, even when repository's projects are disabled. Moreover, the project sidebar selector is now hidden if no projects (repository-wide + organization-wide) are available. Fixes forgejo/forgejo#5666 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7999 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
GustedandGusted
|
07a6b6ce82 |
chore: make use of go1.26 features (#12369)
Allows us to make use of Go features introduced in v1.26. I require a feature from v1.26 for a PR I want to make later. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12369 Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|
Nils GorollandGusted
|
9d323c5125 |
chore: remove #11024 workarounds (#12301)
remove two workarounds which are not required any more Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12301 Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org> |