Backport #30674 & #30679 by @lunny
When visiting a pull request files which head repository has been
deleted, it will panic because headrepo is nil.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Backport #30594 by wxiaoguang
Thanks to @Zottelchen for looking into problem and proposing the fix.
Ref: https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/3017 ,
https://peps.python.org/pep-0503/
This PR's change is from Zottelchen's work.
And I by the way rename the `$p` to `$pd` because `p` is used as
"package" in code, while `pd` is used as "package description".
----
Co-authored-by: Zottelchen
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Backport #30529 by @silverwind
Fixes: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/30512
I think this does mean those tools would run on a potential `vendor`
directory, but I'm not sure we really support vendoring of dependencies
anymore.
`release` has a `vendor` prerequisite so likely the source tarballs
contain vendor files?
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Backport #30104 by @lunny
Agit returned result should be from `ProcReceive` hook but not
`PostReceive` hook. Then for all non-agit pull requests, it will not
check the pull requests for every pushing `refs/pull/%d/head`.
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Resolve#23848
This PR put an edit file button on pull request files to allow a quick
edit for a file. After the edit finished, it will return back to the
viewed file position on pull request files tab.
It also use a branch view file link instead of commit link when it's a
non-commit pull request files view.
<img width="1532" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/81045/3637ca4c-89d5-4621-847b-79702a44f617">
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Fixes https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/30005. Regression from
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/29945.
There was only once instance of `tw-content-center` before that PR, so I
just ran below command and reverted that one instance.
```sh
perl -p -i -e 's#tw-content-center#tw-items-center#g' web_src/js/**/* templates/**/* models/**/* tests/**/*
```
This PR will avoid load pullrequest.Issue twice in pull request list
page. It will reduce x times database queries for those WIP pull
requests.
Partially fix#29585
---------
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Regression of #29493. If a branch has been deleted, repushing it won't
restore it.
Lunny may have noticed that, but I didn't delve into the comment then
overlooked it:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/29493#discussion_r1509046867
The additional comments added are to explain the issue I found during
testing, which are unrelated to the fixes.
Fix#20175
Current implementation of API does not allow creating pull requests
between branches of the same
repo when you specify *namespace* (owner of the repo) in `head` field in
http request body.
---
Although GitHub implementation of API allows performing such action and
since Gitea targeting
compatibility with GitHub API I see it as an appropriate change.
I'm proposing a fix to the described problem and test case which covers
this logic.
My use-case just in case:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/20175#issuecomment-1711283022
Fix#29763
This PR fixes 2 problems with CodeOwner in the pull request.
- Don't use the pull request base branch but merge-base as a diff base to
detect the code owner.
- CodeOwner detection in fork repositories will be disabled because
almost all the fork repositories will not change CODEOWNERS files but it
should not be used on fork repositories' pull requests.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Unlike other async processing in the queue, we should sync branches to
the DB immediately when handling git hook calling. If it fails, users
can see the error message in the output of the git command.
It can avoid potential inconsistency issues, and help #29494.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Partially caused by #29149
When use
```go
releases, err := getReleaseInfos(ctx, &repo_model.FindReleasesOptions{
ListOptions: db.ListOptions{Page: 1, PageSize: 1},
RepoID: ctx.Repo.Repository.ID,
TagNames: []string{ctx.Params("*")},
// only show draft releases for users who can write, read-only users shouldn't see draft releases.
IncludeDrafts: writeAccess,
})
```
replace
```go
release, err := repo_model.GetRelease(ctx, ctx.Repo.Repository.ID, ctx.Params("*"))
```
It missed `IncludeTags: true,`. That means this bug will be occupied only when the release is a tag.
This PR will fix
- Get the right tag record when it's not a release
- Display correct tag tab but not release tag when it's a tag.
- The button will bring the tag name to the new page when it's a single tag page
- the new page will automatically hide the release target inputbox when the tag name is pre filled. This should be backport to v1.21.
Thanks to inferenceus : some sort orders on the "explore/users" page
could list users by their lastlogintime/updatetime.
It leaks user's activity unintentionally. This PR makes that page only
use "supported" sort orders.
Removing the "sort orders" could also be a good solution, while IMO at
the moment keeping the "create time" and "name" orders is also fine, in
case some users would like to find a target user in the search result,
the "sort order" might help.
Since `modules/context` has to depend on `models` and many other
packages, it should be moved from `modules/context` to
`services/context` according to design principles. There is no logic
code change on this PR, only move packages.
- Move `code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/context` to
`code.gitea.io/gitea/services/context`
- Move `code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/contexttest` to
`code.gitea.io/gitea/services/contexttest` because of depending on
context
- Move `code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/upload` to
`code.gitea.io/gitea/services/context/upload` because of depending on
context
Fixes#26691
Revert #24972
The alpine package manager expects `noarch` packages in the index of
other architectures too.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Fix#14459
The following users can add/remove review requests of a PR
- the poster of the PR
- the owner or collaborators of the repository
- members with read permission on the pull requests unit
Fixes the reason why #29101 is hard to replicate.
Related #29297
Create a repo with a file with minimum size 4097 bytes (I use 10000) and
execute the following code:
```go
gitRepo, err := gitrepo.OpenRepository(db.DefaultContext, <repo>)
assert.NoError(t, err)
commit, err := gitRepo.GetCommit(<sha>)
assert.NoError(t, err)
entry, err := commit.GetTreeEntryByPath(<file>)
assert.NoError(t, err)
b := entry.Blob()
// Create a reader
r, err := b.DataAsync()
assert.NoError(t, err)
defer r.Close()
// Create a second reader
r2, err := b.DataAsync()
assert.NoError(t, err) // Should be no error but is ErrNotExist
defer r2.Close()
```
The problem is the check in `CatFileBatch`:
79217ea63c/modules/git/repo_base_nogogit.go (L81-L87)
`Buffered() > 0` is used to check if there is a "operation" in progress
at the moment. This is a problem because we can't control the internal
buffer in the `bufio.Reader`. The code above demonstrates a sequence
which initiates an operation for which the code thinks there is no
active processing. The second call to `DataAsync()` therefore reuses the
existing instances instead of creating a new batch reader.
Giteabot