When creating a repo, the "FORCE_PRIVATE" config option should be
respected, `readonly` doesn't work for checkbox, so it should use
`disabled` attribute.
Fix#31002
1. Mention Make sure `Host` and `X-Fowarded-Proto` headers are correctly passed to Gitea
2. Clarify the basic requirements and move the "general configuration" to the top
3. Add a comment for the "container registry"
4. Use 1.21 behavior if the reverse proxy is not correctly configured
Co-authored-by: KN4CK3R <admin@oldschoolhack.me>
The `errorCode` and `warningCode` options were removed at some point,
they are not recognized by golangci-lint any more at least and they do
not match their published json schema. `confidence` and
`ignore-generated-header` are at the default value so does not need to
be configured.
https://golangci-lint.run/usage/linters/#revive
Add a configuration item to enable S3 virtual-hosted style (V2) to solve
the problem caused by some S3 service providers not supporting path
style (V1).
Fix#30872
We will assume the database is consistent before executing the
migration. So the indexes should exist. Removing `IF EXIST` then is safe
enough.
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Forbid
[deprecated](https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-3/#word-break-property)
`break-word` and fix all occurences.
Regarding `overflow-wrap: break-word` vs `overflow-wrap: anywhere`:
Example of difference: https://jsfiddle.net/silverwind/1va6972r/
[Here](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/77651244) it says:
> The differences between normal, break-word and anywhere are only clear
if you are using width: min-content on the element containing the text,
and you also set a max-width. A pretty rare scenario.
I don't think this difference will make any practical impact as we are
not hitting this rare scenario.
It's time (maybe somewhat late) to remove some deprecated stuff for the
runner.
- `x-runner-version`: runners needn't to report version in every
request, they will call `Declare`.
- `AgentLabels`: runners will report them as `Labels`.
Fix#30521
we should sync branches first, then detect default branch, or
`git_model.FindBranchNames` will always return empty list, and the
detection will be wrong.
# The problem
The previous implementation will start multiple POST requests from the
frontend when moving a column and another bug is moving the default
column will never be remembered in fact.
# What's changed
- [x] This PR will allow the default column to move to a non-first
position
- [x] And it also uses one request instead of multiple requests when
moving the columns
- [x] Use a star instead of a pin as the icon for setting the default
column action
- [x] Inserted new column will be append to the end
- [x] Fix#30701 the newly added issue will be append to the end of the
default column
- [x] Fix when deleting a column, all issues in it will be displayed
from UI but database records exist.
- [x] Add a limitation for columns in a project to 20. So the sorting
will not be overflow because it's int8.
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Hello! After contributing for some time I am interested in taking a more
involved role as a maintainer. When time allows it, I plan to perform
code reviews, continue resolving/triaging issues, and engage with the
community to see if I can offer any useful insights. My current
interests are in backend work, but I plan to study the web frontend
architecture to see if I can contribute there as well.
Thanks for this awesome project. I hope I can both learn and contribute
to its continued success!
PR list:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed+author%3Akemzeb
Discord: kemzeb
Merging PR may fail because of various problems. The pull request may
have a dirty state because there is no transaction when merging a pull
request. ref
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/25741#issuecomment-2074126393
This PR moves all database update operations to post-receive handler for
merging a pull request and having a database transaction. That means if
database operations fail, then the git merging will fail, the git client
will get a fail result.
There are already many tests for pull request merging, so we don't need
to add a new one.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
wxiaoguang