- https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/1473 made that dangerous
actions such as deletion also would need to type in the owner's name.
This was apparently not reflected to the deletion modal for migrations
that failed or were cancelled.
- This is a 'front-port' of the already existing patch on v1.21 and
v1.20, but applied on top of what Gitea has done to rework the LTA
mechanism. Forgejo will stick with the reworked mechanism by the Forgejo
Security team for the time being. The removal of legacy code (AES-GCM) has been
left out.
- The current architecture is inherently insecure, because you can
construct the 'secret' cookie value with values that are available in
the database. Thus provides zero protection when a database is
dumped/leaked.
- This patch implements a new architecture that's inspired from: [Paragonie Initiative](https://paragonie.com/blog/2015/04/secure-authentication-php-with-long-term-persistence#secure-remember-me-cookies).
- Integration testing is added to ensure the new mechanism works.
- Removes a setting, because it's not used anymore.
- Add the experimental
[deacode](https://pkg.go.dev/golang.org/x/tools/internal/cmd/deadcode)
linter to Forgejo.
- To deal with false positives that can happen due to build tags or with code
that's currently only referenced by test code, the output of the tool is
compared against a known-good output.
- This commit doesn't make any attempt to remove any deadcode.
(cherry picked from commit ac462279e9)
(cherry picked from commit b5ea6e85ac)
This field adds the possibility to set the update date when modifying
an issue through the API.
A 'NoAutoDate' in-memory field is added in the Issue struct.
If the update_at field is set, NoAutoDate is set to true and the
Issue's UpdatedUnix field is filled.
That information is passed down to the functions that actually updates
the database, which have been modified to not auto update dates if
requested.
A guard is added to the 'EditIssue' API call, to checks that the
udpate_at date is between the issue's creation date and the current
date (to avoid 'malicious' changes). It also limits the new feature
to project's owners and admins.
(cherry picked from commit c524d33402)
Add a SetIssueUpdateDate() function in services/issue.go
That function is used by some API calls to set the NoAutoDate and
UpdatedUnix fields of an Issue if an updated_at date is provided.
(cherry picked from commit f061caa655)
Add an updated_at field to the API calls related to Issue's Labels.
The update date is applied to the issue's comment created to inform
about the modification of the issue's labels.
(cherry picked from commit ea36cf80f5)
Add an updated_at field to the API call for issue's attachment creation
The update date is applied to the issue's comment created to inform
about the modification of the issue's content, and is set as the
asset creation date.
(cherry picked from commit 96150971ca)
Checking Issue changes, with and without providing an updated_at date
Those unit tests are added:
- TestAPIEditIssueWithAutoDate
- TestAPIEditIssueWithNoAutoDate
- TestAPIAddIssueLabelsWithAutoDate
- TestAPIAddIssueLabelsWithNoAutoDate
- TestAPICreateIssueAttachmentWithAutoDate
- TestAPICreateIssueAttachmentWithNoAutoDate
(cherry picked from commit 4926a5d7a2)
Add an updated_at field to the API call for issue's comment creation
The update date is used as the comment creation date, and is applied to
the issue as the update creation date.
(cherry picked from commit 76c8faecdc)
Add an updated_at field to the API call for issue's comment edition
The update date is used as the comment update date, and is applied to
the issue as an update date.
(cherry picked from commit cf787ad7fd)
Add an updated_at field to the API call for comment's attachment creation
The update date is applied to the comment, and is set as the asset
creation date.
(cherry picked from commit 1e4ff424d3)
Checking Comment changes, with and without providing an updated_at date
Those unit tests are added:
- TestAPICreateCommentWithAutoDate
- TestAPICreateCommentWithNoAutoDate
- TestAPIEditCommentWithAutoDate
- TestAPIEditCommentWithNoAutoDate
- TestAPICreateCommentAttachmentWithAutoDate
- TestAPICreateCommentAttachmentWithNoAutoDate
(cherry picked from commit da932152f1)
Pettier code to set the update time of comments
Now uses sess.AllCols().NoAutoToime().SetExpr("updated_unix", ...)
XORM is smart enough to compose one single SQL UPDATE which all
columns + updated_unix.
(cherry picked from commit 1f6a42808d)
Issue edition: Keep the max of the milestone and issue update dates.
When editing an issue via the API, an updated_at date can be provided.
If the EditIssue call changes the issue's milestone, the milestone's
update date is to be changed accordingly, but only with a greater
value.
This ensures that a milestone's update date is the max of all issue's
update dates.
(cherry picked from commit 8f22ea182e)
Rewrite the 'AutoDate' tests using subtests
Also add a test to check the permissions to set a date, and a test
to check update dates on milestones.
The tests related to 'AutoDate' are:
- TestAPIEditIssueAutoDate
- TestAPIAddIssueLabelsAutoDate
- TestAPIEditIssueMilestoneAutoDate
- TestAPICreateIssueAttachmentAutoDate
- TestAPICreateCommentAutoDate
- TestAPIEditCommentWithDate
- TestAPICreateCommentAttachmentAutoDate
(cherry picked from commit 961fd13c55)
(cherry picked from commit d52f4eea44)
(cherry picked from commit 3540ea2a43)
Conflicts:
services/issue/issue.go
https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/1415
(cherry picked from commit 56720ade00)
Conflicts:
routers/api/v1/repo/issue_label.go
https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/1462
(cherry picked from commit 47c78927d6)
(cherry picked from commit 2030f3b965)
(cherry picked from commit f02aeb7698)
Conflicts:
routers/api/v1/repo/issue_attachment.go
routers/api/v1/repo/issue_comment_attachment.go
https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/1575
(cherry picked from commit d072525b35)
(cherry picked from commit 8424d0ab3d)
(cherry picked from commit 5cc62caec7)
(cherry picked from commit d6300d5dcd)
[FEAT] allow setting the update date on issues and comments (squash) apply the 'update_at' value to the cross-ref comments (#1676)
[this is a follow-up to PR #764]
When a comment of issue A referencing issue B is added with a forced 'updated_at' date, that date has to be applied to the comment created in issue B.
-----
Comment:
While trying my 'RoundUp migration script', I found that this case was forgotten in PR #764 - my apologies...
I'll try to write a functional test, base on models/issues/issue_xref_test.go
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/1676
Co-authored-by: fluzz <fluzz@freedroid.org>
Co-committed-by: fluzz <fluzz@freedroid.org>
(cherry picked from commit ac4f727f63)
(cherry picked from commit 5110476ee9)
- Currently the confirmation for dangerous actions such as transferring
the repository or deleting it only requires the user to ~~copy paste~~
type the repository name.
- This can be problematic when the user has a fork or another repository
with the same name as an organization's repository, and the confirmation
doesn't make clear that it could be deleting the wrong repository. While
it's mentioned in the dialog, it's better to be on the safe side and
also add the owner's name to be an element that has to be typed for
these dangerous actions.
- Added integration tests.
(cherry picked from commit bf679b24dd)
(cherry picked from commit 1963085dd9)
(cherry picked from commit fb94095d19)
(cherry picked from commit e1d1e46afe)
(cherry picked from commit 93993029e4)
(cherry picked from commit df3b058179)
(cherry picked from commit 8ccc6b9cba)
(cherry picked from commit 9fbe28fca3)
- As per https://codeberg.org/forgejo/discussions/issues/53#issuecomment-1070207
- Using the `CODEOWNERS` feature it should speed up the development
process for contributors as for the most common PRs the right reviewers
will be added by Forgejo automatically. They can be added very
precisely according to the changed files of the PR.
- This feature is implemented in v1.21, which means it's not available
on Codeberg.
(cherry picked from commit 1511ef1c80)
(cherry picked from commit 99999e3a03)
(cherry picked from commit 0b0dd6f7a9)
(cherry picked from commit d42940034f)
(cherry picked from commit 5be6e7d254)
(cherry picked from commit d12d6e8633)
(cherry picked from commit d3b3e691bf)
(cherry picked from commit 2a13f95551)
(cherry picked from commit 6d882ede35)
Signed-off-by: cassiozareck <cassiomilczareck@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit a878adfe62)
Adding description and Forgejo SVG
(cherry picked from commit 13738c0380)
Undo reordering and tmpl redirection
(cherry picked from commit 9ae51c46f4)
(cherry picked from commit 70fffdc61d)
(cherry picked from commit c0ebfa9da3)
(cherry picked from commit 9922c92787)
(cherry picked from commit 00c0effbc7)
(cherry picked from commit e4c9525b13)
(cherry picked from commit 09d7b83211)
(cherry picked from commit bbcd5975c9)
(cherry picked from commit 55c70a0e18)
(cherry picked from commit 76596410c0)
(cherry picked from commit 1308043931)
(cherry picked from commit 919d6aedfe)
[FEAT] add Forgero Git Service (squash) more tests
Previously only Gitea service was being tested under self-hosted migrations. Since Forgejo is also self-hosted and in fact use the same downloader/migrator we can add to this suite another test that will do the same, migrating the same repository under the same local instance but for the Forgejo service (represented by 9)
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/1709
Co-authored-by: zareck <cassiomilczareck@gmail.com>
Co-committed-by: zareck <cassiomilczareck@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 40a4b8f1a8)
(cherry picked from commit 3198b4a642)
(cherry picked from commit 57e597bf7e)
(cherry picked from commit 643a2b0e81)
(cherry picked from commit f10faffb4f)
(cherry picked from commit b440c5767e)
[TESTS] verify facts for the admin storage documentation (squash)
(cherry picked from commit d83d8ce57b)
(cherry picked from commit d8855ef27c)
(cherry picked from commit 11230466ec)
(cherry picked from commit b2cdd9d971)
(cherry picked from commit a0a5e78524)
(cherry picked from commit 846413110f)
(cherry picked from commit 72b92d5a78)
(cherry picked from commit 7e039a9427)
(cherry picked from commit 227d42a1b6)
(cherry picked from commit 6488950a9b)
(cherry picked from commit 0285c99774)
The tests at tests/integration/migration-test/migration_test.go will
not run any Forgejo migration when using the gitea-*.sql.gz files
because they do not contain a ForgejoVersion row which is interpreted
as a new Forgejo installation for which there is no need for migration.
Create a situation by which the ForgejoVersion table exists and has a
version of 0 in tests/integration/migration-test/forgejo-v1.19.0.*.sql.gz
thus ensuring all Forgejo migrations are run.
The forgejo*.sql.gz files do not have any Gitea related records, which
will be interpreted by the Gitea migrations as a new installation that
does not need any migration. As a consequence the migration tests run
when using forgejo-v1.19.0.*.sql.gz are exclusively about Forgejo
migrations.
(cherry picked from commit ec8003859c)
(cherry picked from commit 697570ff39)
(cherry picked from commit f041aec172)
(cherry picked from commit 60463e3bab)
(cherry picked from commit b2fc2a7c13)
(cherry picked from commit fb2759b6af)
(cherry picked from commit 37cfc3b227)
(cherry picked from commit 832607500a)
(cherry picked from commit 143d4007b1)
(cherry picked from commit a17e803fbf)
(cherry picked from commit 72ffd49bc3)
(cherry picked from commit 9b92a5fd72)
(cherry picked from commit 0a334d0a9b)
(cherry picked from commit 3add683c94)
- Implements https://codeberg.org/forgejo/discussions/issues/32#issuecomment-918737
- Allows to add Forgejo-specific migrations that don't interfere with Gitea's migration logic. Please do note that we cannot liberally add migrations for Gitea tables, as they might do their own migrations in a future version on that table, and that could undo our migrations. Luckily, we don't have a scenario where that's needed and thus not taken into account.
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/795
(cherry picked from commit 8ee32978c0)
(cherry picked from commit c240b34f59)
(cherry picked from commit 03936c6492)
(cherry picked from commit a20ed852f8)
(cherry picked from commit 1dfa82676f)
(cherry picked from commit c39ae0bf8a)
(cherry picked from commit cfaff08996)
(cherry picked from commit 94a458835a)
(cherry picked from commit 61a3cf77df)
(cherry picked from commit abb350fde8)
(cherry picked from commit 5194829d6b)
(cherry picked from commit 89239a60f2)
(cherry picked from commit 683cfd86ef)
(cherry picked from commit f4546cfed9)
(cherry picked from commit 86614d5826)
(cherry picked from commit e4b9c32187)
(cherry picked from commit 8c253719af)
(cherry picked from commit 857365d6c1)
(cherry picked from commit a488b3952f)
(cherry picked from commit 98313c4910)
(cherry picked from commit 430d95e824)
(cherry picked from commit 08bf9d918f)
(cherry picked from commit f8a170e2d0)
(cherry picked from commit d20e325378)
Follow-up to d58c542579 for Forgejo.
By default, Gitea does not select any map service that can be used
to introduce a 'Show this place on a map' button in the location
field of a user profile. Before I tried upstreaming this change to
Gitea, this was the case in Forgejo. This patch essentially recovers
this functionality, which is nice for public-facing instances and
communities.
Links to original PRs:
- https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/1076
- https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/26214
(cherry picked from commit bb187d5f61)
(cherry picked from commit ce02ef9078)
(cherry picked from commit 6b75c40e25)
(cherry picked from commit 6bc8e9f573)
(cherry picked from commit 063f8afdf7)
(cherry picked from commit c5cc736b72)
(cherry picked from commit 7b1bb4bedc)
(cherry picked from commit 2a022dceb4)
(cherry picked from commit a946c142d2)
(cherry picked from commit 8a4ea0c7ab)
(cherry picked from commit 37bfb05b34)
(cherry picked from commit 12fbbb1754)
(cherry picked from commit abe9de2cd9)
(cherry picked from commit 84db578717)
(cherry picked from commit 1beab7af46)
- Upstream chosen `Handlebars` as language for the templates, presumenly
because Github doesn't have an syntax highlighter for Go.
- Forgejo does have syntax highlighting support for Go templates, so use that.
(cherry picked from commit a79718522d)
(cherry picked from commit 380d847e5c)
(cherry picked from commit 4126a9672d)
(cherry picked from commit afde0ed822)
(cherry picked from commit 6ddaca0061)
(cherry picked from commit 454b2f6b35)
(cherry picked from commit 58c10e1f93)
(cherry picked from commit 19ec0a5536)
(cherry picked from commit c3717ae4de)
(cherry picked from commit 6c74bbe575)
(cherry picked from commit 9cb48db780)
(cherry picked from commit 19cb774553)
(cherry picked from commit ac35eb83cd)
(cherry picked from commit 986a306d22)
(cherry picked from commit cd841848ee)
