This is a port of a gitea PR: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34512.
I have added some copy-editing commits on top for cleanliness.
I haven't tested the changes manually and only relied on the existing automated test.
## Checklist
### Tests
- 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.
### 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] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [ ] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Co-authored-by: Jim Lin <jim@andestech.com>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8041
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Antonin Delpeuch <antonin@delpeuch.eu>
Co-committed-by: Antonin Delpeuch <antonin@delpeuch.eu>
- `testPatch` is a function that is called to test a pull request and determine the state of the pull request. Checking for merge conflicts, check if the diff is empty and if the pull request modifies any protected files.
- The checking for merge conflict and if the diff is empty used git commands that relied on a working tree to correctly functions. Forgejo store repositories in a bare format which do not contain a working tree. This means that a temporary copy was created every time a pull request had to be re-checked and for large repositories involving quite some I/O interaction.
- This patch adjusts those codepaths to instead use newer Git plumbing commands that work without requiring a work tree and can thus be used directly on the bare repository. The merge conflict is now done via [`git-merge-tree(1)`](https://git-scm.com/docs/git-merge-tree/) and checking if the diff is empty is done via [`git-diff-tree(1)`](https://git-scm.com/docs/git-diff-tree).
- If the function is called to test a patch where the head and base repository are not the same, then [Git alternate](https://git-scm.com/docs/gitglossary#Documentation/gitglossary.txt-aiddefalternateobjectdatabaseaalternateobjectdatabase) is used to make the head commit available in the base repository, this done on a per git command basis via the `GIT_ALTERNATE_OBJECT_DIRECTORIES` environment.
- As far as I can understand the documentation and the existing code, there's no edge case that the new code cannot handle. It also results in a cleaner codepath, as the existing code did a lot of checking and merging in a more traditional approach that required a lot of (parsing) code, while the new code offloads this to git and has a trivial parser of the output.
- Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#7701
- Added exhaustive integration testing.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7727
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
- The way of doing conflict testing via `git apply` stems from Gogs, it was replaced in Gitea 1.18 by `git read-tree -m` which uses 3-way merge [^0]. The option to disable the fallback `git apply` was introduced in Gitea 1.19 and enabled by default [^1].
- Given it was mostly kept just in case `git read-tree -m` was shown to be unreliable and it has been sufficiently battle tested with no known issues (in Forgejo), it's time to remove this way of conflict testing. I am not aware of anyone using this option or having any benefits over a 3-way merge via `git read-tree -m`.
[^0]: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/18004
[^1]: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/22130
<!--start release-notes-assistant-->
## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Breaking features
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7745): <!--number 7745 --><!--line 0 --><!--description cmVtb3ZlIHRoZSBsZWdhY3kgYFRFU1RfQ09ORkxJQ1RJTkdfUEFUQ0hFU19XSVRIX0dJVF9BUFBMWWAgc2V0dGluZw==-->remove the legacy `TEST_CONFLICTING_PATCHES_WITH_GIT_APPLY` setting<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7745
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Closes#7525
This is better for performance, because it can do more work in-memory. It also preserves unknown headers, which can be important for some clients. For example, Jujutsu uses a non-standard "change-id" header to track commits across rebase and amend, but regular git-rebase drops such unknown headers.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7527
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Remo Senekowitsch <remo@buenzli.dev>
Co-committed-by: Remo Senekowitsch <remo@buenzli.dev>
- Make use of `test.MockVariableValue` to override variables for the
duration of the test.
- Don't needlessly call `onGiteaRun`, its only needed when a HTTP server
needs to be called by the code.
- When `onGiteaRun` is used, make use of the passed parameters, such as
the passed `*testing.T` variable and `*url.URL` (this also avoids
needing to serve the routers in the test code again).
- Use `(*url.URL).JoinPath` to craft new URLs.
- Don't override `setting.AppURL` & `setting.Database.LogSQL` when its
does not affect the test.
- Add empty fixture files for `FederatedUser` & `FederationHost` so they
are truncated and do not persist between tests.
Fix#31423
(cherry picked from commit f4b8f6fc40ce2869135372a5c6ec6418d27ebfba)
Conflicts:
models/fixtures/comment.yml
comment fixtures have to be shifted because there is one more in Forgejo
This reverts commit 4ed372af13.
This change from Gitea was not considered by the Forgejo UI team and there is a consensus that it feels like a regression.
The test which was added in that commit is kept and modified to test that reviews can successfully be submitted on closed and merged PRs.
Closesforgejo/design#11
Running git update-index for every individual file is slow, so add and
remove everything with a single git command.
When such a big commit lands in the default branch, it could cause PR
creation and patch checking for all open PRs to be slow, or time out
entirely. For example, a commit that removes 1383 files was measured to
take more than 60 seconds and timed out. With this change checking took
about a second.
This is related to #27967, though this will not help with commits that
change many lines in few files.
(cherry picked from commit b88e5fc72d99e9d4a0aa9c13f70e0a9e967fe057)
Enable [unparam](https://github.com/mvdan/unparam) linter.
Often I could not tell the intention why param is unused, so I put
`//nolint` for those cases like webhook request creation functions never
using `ctx`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
(cherry picked from commit fc2d75f86d77b022ece848acf2581c14ef21d43b)
Conflicts:
modules/setting/config_env.go
modules/storage/azureblob.go
services/webhook/dingtalk.go
services/webhook/discord.go
services/webhook/feishu.go
services/webhook/matrix.go
services/webhook/msteams.go
services/webhook/packagist.go
services/webhook/slack.go
services/webhook/telegram.go
services/webhook/wechatwork.go
run make lint-go and fix Forgejo specific warnings
This PR introduces the `ReviewedOn` and `ReviewedBy` variables for the
default merge message templates (e.g.,
`.gitea/default_merge_message/MERGE_TEMPLATE.md`).
This allows customizing the default merge messages while retaining these
trailers.
This also moves the associated logic out of `pull.tmpl` into the
relevant Go function.
This is a first contribution towards #11077.
---
For illustration, this allows to recreate the "default default" merge
message with the following template:
```
.gitea/default_merge_message/MERGE_TEMPLATE.md
Merge pull request '${PullRequestTitle}' (${PullRequestReference}) from ${HeadBranch} into ${BaseBranch}
${ReviewedOn}
${ReviewedBy}
```
(cherry picked from commit da4bbc42477ba04d175cc0775a0c5ec90c4c24fe)
Conflicts:
docs/content/usage/merge-message-templates.en-us.md
not in Forgejo
templates/repo/issue/view_content/pull.tmpl
trivial context conflict
The right to force merge is uses the wrong predicate and
applies to instance admins:
ctx.user.IsAdmin
It must apply to repository admins and use the following predicate:
ctx.userPerm.IsAdmin()
This regression is from the ApplyToAdmins implementation in
79b7089360.
Fixes: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/3780
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>
(cherry picked from commit ebf0c969403d91ed80745ff5bd7dfbdb08174fc7)
Conflicts:
modules/private/hook.go
routers/private/hook_post_receive.go
trivial conflicts because
263a716cb5 * Performance optimization for git push (#30104)
was not cherry-picked and because of
998a431747 Do not update PRs based on events that happened before they existed
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/25812#issuecomment-2099833692
Follow #30573
(cherry picked from commit f7d2f695a4c57b245830a526e77fa62e99e00254)
Conflicts:
services/pull/check.go
trivial conflict because
9b2536b78fdcd3cf444a2f54857d9871e153858f Update misspell to 0.5.1 and add `misspellings.csv` (#30573)
was not cherry-picked
More about codespell: https://github.com/codespell-project/codespell .
I personally introduced it to dozens if not hundreds of projects already and so far only positive feedback.
```
❯ grep lint-spell Makefile
@echo " - lint-spell lint spelling"
@echo " - lint-spell-fix lint spelling and fix issues"
lint: lint-frontend lint-backend lint-spell
lint-fix: lint-frontend-fix lint-backend-fix lint-spell-fix
.PHONY: lint-spell
lint-spell: lint-codespell
.PHONY: lint-spell-fix
lint-spell-fix: lint-codespell-fix
❯ git grep lint- -- .forgejo/
.forgejo/workflows/testing.yml: - run: make --always-make -j$(nproc) lint-backend checks-backend # ensure the "go-licenses" make target runs
.forgejo/workflows/testing.yml: - run: make lint-frontend
```
so how would you like me to invoke `lint-codespell` on CI? (without that would be IMHO very suboptimal and let typos sneak in)
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/3270
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Yaroslav Halchenko <debian@onerussian.com>
Co-committed-by: Yaroslav Halchenko <debian@onerussian.com>
Resolve all cases for `unused parameter` and `unnecessary type
arguments`
Related: #30729
---------
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
(cherry picked from commit e80466f7349164ce4cf3c07bdac30d736d20f035)
Conflicts:
modules/markup/markdown/transform_codespan.go
modules/setting/incoming_email.go
routers/api/v1/admin/user_badge.go
routers/private/hook_pre_receive.go
tests/integration/repo_search_test.go
resolved by discarding the change, this is linting only and
for the sake of avoiding future conflicts
Noteable additions:
- `redefines-builtin-id` forbid variable names that shadow go builtins
- `empty-lines` remove unnecessary empty lines that `gofumpt` does not
remove for some reason
- `superfluous-else` eliminate more superfluous `else` branches
Rules are also sorted alphabetically and I cleaned up various parts of
`.golangci.yml`.
(cherry picked from commit 74f0c84fa4245a20ce6fb87dac1faf2aeeded2a2)
Conflicts:
.golangci.yml
apply the linter recommendations to Forgejo code as well
* Split TestPullRequest out of AddTestPullRequestTask
* A Created field is added to the Issue table
* The Created field is set to the time (with nano resolution) on creation
* Record the nano time repo_module.PushUpdateOptions is created by the hook
* The decision to update a pull request created before a commit was
pushed is based on the time (with nano resolution) the git hook
was run and the Created field
It ensures the following happens:
* commit C is pushed
* the git hook queues AddTestPullRequestTask for processing and returns with success
* TestPullRequest is not called yet
* a pull request P with commit C as the head is created
* TestPullRequest runs and ignores P because it was created after the commit was received
When the "created" column is NULL, no verification is done, pull
requests that were created before the column was created in the
database cannot be newer than the latest call to a git hook.
Fixes: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2009
As in commits page we show the author of the commit in the commits
dropdown and not the committer.
Commits Page:
and the same contents in our dropdown:
fixes#29588
(cherry picked from commit 07bcfc171bcccfe78a86c7b4b3f9b729ba7d60b6)
Resolves#29965.
---
Manually tested this by:
- Following the
[installation](https://docs.gitea.com/next/installation/install-with-docker#basics)
guide (but built a local Docker image instead)
- Creating 2 users, one who is the `Owner` of a newly-created repository
and the other a `Collaborator`
- Had the `Collaborator` create a PR that the `Owner` reviews
- `Collaborator` resolves conversation and `Owner` merges PR
And with this change we see that we can no longer see re-request review
button for the `Owner`:
<img width="1351" alt="Screenshot 2024-03-25 at 12 39 18 AM"
src="bcd9c579-3cf7-474f-a51e-b436fe1a39a4">
(cherry picked from commit 242b331260925e604150346e61329097d5731e77)
- Currently protected branch rules do not apply to admins, however in
some cases (like in the case of Forgejo project) you might also want to
apply these rules to admins to avoid accidental merges.
- Add new option to configure this on a per-rule basis.
- Adds integration tests.
- Resolves#65
Fixes https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/28297
This PR also fixed a problem that it needs a database transaction when
removing the WIP title.
---
Resolves#2771
Also partially ports gitea#29783
(cherry picked from commit 17d7ab5ad4ce3d0fbc1251572c22687c237a30b1)
The fix against the race incorrectly assumes the sha of the commit being
pushed belongs to the base repository. It finds the highest possible
pull request ID from the head repository instead of looking it up in
the base repository.
Figuring out if a PR was created in the future based on the highest
index of the base repository would require collecting all of them
because there is no way to know in advance which repository may be
involved in the race.
Fixing this race can be done either by:
* Introducing a new field in the pull_request table https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/2842
which feels more like a hack than a real solution
* Refactoring the logic
which would be a significant undertaking
The race has been in the codebase for a very long time and manifests
itself in the CI, when events happen in quick succession. The only
concrete manifestation was however fixed by https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2009
Since this race now only exists in theory and not in practice, let's
revert this bugous commit until a proper solution is implemented.
Fixes: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2817
This reverts commit 036f1eddc5.
Conflicts:
services/pull/pull.go
(cherry picked from commit f8ab9dafb7a173a35e9308f8f784735b0f822439)
Conflicts:
routers/web/repo/fork.go
trivial context conflict, the file does not exist in Forgejo
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>
(cherry picked from commit 62f8174aa2fae1481c7e17a6afcb731a5b178cd0)
Conflicts:
models/activities/notification_list.go
moved to models/activities/notification.go
It's unnecessary to detect the repository object format from git
repository. Just use the repository's object format name.
(cherry picked from commit 3c6fc25a77c37d50686caa495d27a31dcef7f75f)
Conflicts:
services/pull/pull.go
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
(cherry picked from commit 29f149bd9f517225a3c9f1ca3fb0a7b5325af696)
Conflicts:
routers/api/packages/alpine/alpine.go
routers/api/v1/repo/issue_reaction.go
routers/install/install.go
routers/web/admin/config.go
routers/web/passkey.go
routers/web/repo/search.go
routers/web/repo/setting/default_branch.go
routers/web/user/home.go
routers/web/user/profile.go
tests/integration/editor_test.go
tests/integration/integration_test.go
tests/integration/mirror_push_test.go
trivial context conflicts
also modified all other occurrences in Forgejo specific files
Now we can get object format name from git command line or from the
database repository table. Assume the column is right, we don't need to
read from git command line every time.
This also fixed a possible bug that the object format is wrong when
migrating a sha256 repository from external.
<img width="658" alt="image"
src="6e9a9dcf-13bf-4267-928b-6bf2c2560423">
(cherry picked from commit b79c30435f439af8243ee281310258cdf141e27b)
Conflicts:
routers/web/repo/blame.go
services/agit/agit.go
context
fixes#21892
This PR disallows merging a PR when not all commit status contexts
configured in the branch protection are met.
Previously, the PR was happy to merge when one commit status was
successful and the other contexts weren't reported.
Any feedback is welcome, first time Go :-)
I'm also not sure if the changes in the template break something else
Given the following branch protection:
This was shown before the change:
With the change, it is now shown as this:
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit a11ccc9fcd61fb25ffb1c37b87a0df4ee9efd84e)
With this option, it is possible to require a linear commit history with
the following benefits over the next best option `Rebase+fast-forward`:
The original commits continue existing, with the original signatures
continuing to stay valid instead of being rewritten, there is no merge
commit, and reverting commits becomes easier.
Closes#24906
