This changes the PR merge process such that annexed files contained in the to-be-merged commits are copied from the head repository to the base repository as part of the merge, similar to how it is done for LFS files.
Fixes#11.
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).
- 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 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)).
- [ ] 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] 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.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo-aneksajo/forgejo-aneksajo/pulls/62
Co-authored-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
Co-committed-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
This adds a new endpoint under `/git-annex-p2phttp` which acts as an
authenticating proxy to git-annex' p2phttp server. This makes it
possible to set `annex+<server-url>/git-annex-p2phttp` as
`remote.<name>.annexurl` and use git-annex fully over http(s) with the
normal credentials and access tokens provided by Forgejo.
Fixes#25.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/matrss/forgejo-aneksajo/pulls/42
Co-authored-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
Co-committed-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
This adds some rudimentary tests that drop files in a repository's clone
as well as from a repository on Forgejo.
Fixes#4.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/matrss/forgejo-aneksajo/pulls/47
Co-authored-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
Co-committed-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
The `git annex testremote` command runs a built-in set of tests against
a remote. It cannot hurt to check our implementation of a git-annex
remote against it too.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/matrss/forgejo-aneksajo/pulls/48
Co-authored-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
Co-committed-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
The previous implementation both uploaded to the annex and pushed to the
git repository. This meant that the tests checking that uploads without
permission fail actually could pass when the git push failed but the
git-annex upload didn't. The tests didn't catch the situation where
unauthorized users could modify the annex.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/matrss/forgejo-aneksajo/pulls/46
Co-authored-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
Co-committed-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
This implements support for uploading files into the annex using the web
interface.
If a repository is a git-annex-enabled repository all files will be
added to it using git annex add. This means that the repository's
configuration for what to put into the annex (annex.largefiles in
gitattributes) will be respected.
Plain git repositories without git-annex will work as before, directly
uploading to git.
Fixes#5.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/matrss/forgejo-aneksajo/pulls/21
Co-authored-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
Co-committed-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
This updates the repo index/file view endpoints so annex files match the way
LFS files are rendered, making annexed files accessible via the web instead of
being black boxes only accessible by git clone.
This mostly just duplicates the existing LFS logic. It doesn't try to combine itself
with the existing logic, to make merging with upstream easier. If upstream ever
decides to accept, I would like to try to merge the redundant logic.
The one bit that doesn't directly copy LFS is my choice to hide annex-symlinks.
LFS files are always _pointer files_ and therefore always render with the "file"
icon and no special label, but annex files come in two flavours: symlinks or
pointer files. I've conflated both kinds to try to give a consistent experience.
The tests in here ensure the correct download link (/media, from the last PR)
renders in both the toolbar and, if a binary file (like most annexed files will be),
in the main pane, but it also adds quite a bit of code to make sure text files
that happen to be annexed are dug out and rendered inline like LFS files are.
Previously, Gitea's LFS support allowed direct-downloads of LFS content,
via http://$HOSTNAME:$PORT/$USER/$REPO/media/branch/$BRANCH/$FILE
Expand that grace to git-annex too. Now /media should provide the
relevant *content* from the .git/annex/objects/ folder.
This adds tests too. And expands the tests to try symlink-based annexing,
since /media implicitly supports both that and pointer-file-based annexing.
The git repository must be closed after using it. Without this change
some tests started to fail due to the lingering repository running into
a timeout.
This moves the `annexObjectPath()` helper out of the tests and into a
dedicated sub-package as `annex.ContentLocation()`, and expands it with
`.Pointer()` (which validates using `git annex examinekey`),
`.IsAnnexed()` and `.Content()` to make it a more useful module.
The tests retain their own wrapper version of `ContentLocation()`
because I tried to follow close to the API modules/lfs uses, which in
terms of abstract `git.Blob` and `git.TreeEntry` objects, not in terms
of `repoPath string`s which are more convenient for the tests.
This makes HTTP symmetric with SSH clone URLs.
This gives us the fancy feature of _anonymous_ downloads,
so people can access datasets without having to set up an
account or manage ssh keys.
Previously, to access "open access" data shared this way,
users would need to:
1. Create an account on gitea.example.com
2. Create ssh keys
3. Upload ssh keys (and make sure to find and upload the correct file)
4. `git clone git@gitea.example.com:user/dataset.git`
5. `cd dataset`
6. `git annex get`
This cuts that down to just the last three steps:
1. `git clone https://gitea.example.com/user/dataset.git`
2. `cd dataset`
3. `git annex get`
This is significantly simpler for downstream users, especially for those
unfamiliar with the command line.
Unfortunately there's no uploading. While git-annex supports uploading
over HTTP to S3 and some other special remotes, it seems to fail on a
_plain_ HTTP remote. See https://github.com/neuropoly/gitea/issues/7
and https://git-annex.branchable.com/forum/HTTP_uploads/#comment-ce28adc128fdefe4c4c49628174d9b92.
This is not a major loss since no one wants uploading to be anonymous anyway.
To support private repos, I had to hunt down and patch a secret extra security
corner that Gitea only applies to HTTP for some reason (services/auth/basic.go).
This was guided by https://git-annex.branchable.com/tips/setup_a_public_repository_on_a_web_site/
Fixes https://github.com/neuropoly/gitea/issues/3
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Guay-Paquet <mathieu.guaypaquet@polymtl.ca>
Fixes https://github.com/neuropoly/gitea/issues/11
Tests:
* `git annex init`
* `git annex copy --from origin`
* `git annex copy --to origin`
over:
* ssh
for:
* the owner
* a collaborator
* a read-only collaborator
* a stranger
in a
* public repo
* private repo
And then confirms:
* Deletion of the remote repo (to ensure lockdown isn't messing with us: https://git-annex.branchable.com/internals/lockdown/#comment-0cc5225dc5abe8eddeb843bfd2fdc382)
------
To support all this:
* Add util.FileCmp()
* Patch withKeyFile() so it can be nested in other copies of itself
-------
Many thanks to Mathieu for giving style tips and catching several bugs,
including a subtle one in util.filecmp() which neutered it.
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Guay-Paquet <mathieu.guay-paquet@polymtl.ca>
Co-authored-by: Matthias Riße <m.risse@fz-juelich.de>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8633
This reverts commit b2a3966e64.
weblate etc. are using this method and need to be updated before the change is enforced.
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8653
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8622
- Do not try to rebase a pull request when it is zero commits behind. We can trust this number as before merging a repository the status of the pull request is mergeable and thus not in a conflict checking stage (where this would be updated).
- This resolves a issue where `git-replay` would rebase a pull request when this is not needed and causes to lose the signature of Git commits and commit IDs as shown in the pullrequest commits timeline.
- Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#8619
- Add a simple integration test that simply checks that after merging a up-to-date pull request via the rebase style that the commit ID didn't change. This demonstrates that it didn't do needlessly rebasing.
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8624
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8611
As far as I can see and tell, the newest webkit version contains a regression that makes this specific test fail. The screenshots that are uploaded upon failure do not seem to suggest that this test should fail.
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8616
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8575
- `getElementById` requires a id to be passed and not a query selector, change it to `querySelector`.
- Regression of forgejo/forgejo#7408
- Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#8571
- Add E2E tests for adding manual tracked time and removing it.
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8576
Reviewed-by: Beowulf <beowulf@beocode.eu>
Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8565
- Since v10 replies are generated on the fly to handle quoted reply (forgejo/forgejo#5677), this means that we have to do some work to construct markdown that is equivalent to the HTML of the comment.
- Images are slightly strange in the context of issues and pull requests, as Forgejo will render them in the context of the repository and as such links such as `/attachments` become `/user/repo/attachments`, the quoted reply did not take into account and would use `/user/repo/attachments` as link which means it gets transformed to `/user/repo//user/repo/attachments`.
- Instead of fixing this on the backend (and maybe break some existing links), teach the quoted reply about this context and remove it from the image source before generating the markdown.
Reported-by: mrwusel (via Matrix)
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8574
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8475closes#7946
- The `rpmsRepoPattern` regex has been fixed to handle releases with dots correctly. For example, the version `0.9.0-alt1.git.17.g2ba905d` is valid, just like `0.1.0-1.n1` mentioned in the issue (https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/7946#issue-1628991)
- getEntries now returns entry names. In the integration tests, there were lines like:
```go
assert.Equal(t, []string{"", ""}, result.ProvideNames)
```
and it’s unclear how such test logic could have ever worked correctly (fixes problems with deps https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/7946#issuecomment-5109795)
- ALT is an acronym for ALT Linux Team, so `Alt` was replaced with `ALT`. Strictly speaking, it should probably be `ALT Linux`, but since we use `Arch` instead of `Arch Linux`, this seems fine. Also, Distrowatch shows `Arch`/`ALT` in its dropdown, so it’s consistent.
- The strings `"Alt Linux Team"` and `"Sisyphus"` in the `Origin` and `Suite` fields have been replaced with `setting.AppName` and `"Unknown"`. `Unknown` is a valid value and is set by default, so this won’t cause any issues.
- The documentation link has been fixed: (404 docs.gitea.com/usage/packages/alt/ -> 200 forgejo.org/docs/latest/user/packages/alt/)
Co-authored-by: Maxim Slipenko <maks1ms@altlinux.org>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8480
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8460
- I cannot give a good rationale why Mobile Safari and webkit is failing this test quite consistently and also succeed quite often. We add a script to ensure that we get a mismatched URL - but these two browsers either ignore this script sometime or delays the execution until after the root URL check is done.
- Because it is very hard to run webkit and mobile safari without running a heavily containerized environment (without a graphical interface) it is near impossible to debug this issue properly; save ourselves a headache and disable it instead. I find it more likely to be a problem with my playwright test than it to be a problem with the mismatched root URL code.
- Ref forgejo/forgejo#8359
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8466
Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8461
- In `test.beforeEach` the browser is navigated to `/user2/repo1/pulls/5` and the test environment is prepared by making sure the pull request is not WIP. At the start of `simple toggle` the browser is navigated to the same URL (and the browser is already on this URL) which the Mobile Chrome browser does not handle gracefully and reliably errors with `net::ERR_ABORTED`.
- Because we are already at that URL, do not try to navigate to it again.
- I cannot offer a rationale why the Mobile Chrome browser does give a error when this happens in subsequent tests of 'Pull: Toggle WIP'.
- Ref forgejo/forgejo#8359
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8463
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8450
The argument order for `ValidatePullRequest` is to first give the new commitID and then the old commit ID.
This results in reviews not being marked as stale when they are not stale and reviews as not stale when they are stale. The test will fail if the fix is not present.
Add testing for the following three scenarios:
1. A review is made, the PR is updated and as a consequence the PR's diff is changed. The review is now marked as stale.
2. A review is made but in the meantime the PR is updated and the review is submitted on a older commit ID. If the diff changed the review is marked as stale.
3. A review that was made against a older commit ID is no longer marked as stale if the PR is force-pushed to that older commit ID.
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8454
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8400
- This test is the source of many transient errors https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/8359#issuecomment-5655557 and is semi-reproducible locally. Any debugging code that is added will result in the error no longer being reproducible, making it hard to say why this is failing.
- It no longer seems necessary to add this `waitForURL` call as Playwright now seems to gracefully handle the case where we want to go to a specific page while playwright might still be navigating to another URL that was initiated by clicking on a button - thus removing the source of the transient error altogether.
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8402
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Beowulf <beowulf@beocode.eu>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8374
- Make the migration to add an index a noop - do not remove it as it would break v12.next & v13.next
- Keep the logic that relies on finding the last run, only always fail to find which is the same as assuming each run is one of a kind
Refs forgejo/forgejo#8373
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8390
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7749
This adds pasted images to the dropzone. To provide the same experience
as when using the dropzone. This gives the possibility to preview and
delete the image. Additionally it provides a copy button to copy the
markdown code for inserting the image.
Fixes#4588
Co-authored-by: Beowulf <beowulf@beocode.eu>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8362
Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Beowulf <beowulf@beocode.eu>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8330Fixes#8329
## 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
- 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.
### Documentation
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
Co-authored-by: floss4good <floss4good@disroot.org>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8349
Reviewed-by: floss4good <floss4good@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8326
- fix: API must use headGitRepo instead of ctx.Repo.GitRepo for comparing
- fix: make API /repos/{owner}/{repo}/compare/{basehead} work with forks
- add test coverage for both fixes and the underlying function `parseCompareInfo`
- refactor and improve part of the helpers from `tests/integration/api_helper_for_declarative_test.go`
- remove a few wrong or misleading comments
Refs forgejo/forgejo#7978
## Note on the focus of the PR
It was initially created to address a regression introduced in v12. But the tests that verify it is fixed discovered a v11.0 bug. They cannot conveniently be separated because they both relate to the same area of code that was previously not covered by any test.
## Note on v11.0 backport
It must be manually done by cherry-picking all commits up to and not including `fix: API must use headGitRepo instead of ctx.Repo.GitRepo for comparing` because it is v12 specific.
## 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
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
### Documentation
- [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.
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8331
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8304
- When doing CRUD actions, the commiter and author are reconstructed and
do not contain the doer's ID. Make sure to pass this ID along so it can
be used to verify the rules of instance signing for CRUD actions.
- Regression of forgejo/forgejo#7693. It seems that previously this
didn't work correctly as it would not care about a empty ID.
- Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#8278
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8318
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8296Closes: #8293
## 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
- 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 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] 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: Lucas Schwiderski <lucas@lschwiderski.de>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8317
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: forgejo-backport-action <forgejo-backport-action@noreply.codeberg.org>
Related: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/3950#issue-785253, https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/3950#issuecomment-1998551.
## Links in dropdown
* move _admin only_ User details link here, give it always-visible text
* add new _self only_ Edit profile link here
* move RSS feed link here
* add new Atom feed link here, previously unadvertised
* add new SSH keys link here (`.keys`), previously unadvertised
* add new GPG keys link here (`.gpg`), previously unadvertised
* move Block/Unblock button here
* move Report abuse link here
If primary action is available (Follow/Unfollow), dropdown with more actions goes after it. If not, it is in line with followers, in place where RSS feed button used to be.
## New dropdown
Related: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/design/issues/23, https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/3853, https://codeberg.org/0ko/forgejo/issues/2.
Implemented a new dropdown: noJS-usable, JS-enhanced for better keyboard navigation and a11y.
Styling is mostly same as the existing ones have, but row density depends on `@media` pointer type.
My choice of CSS properties have been influenced of these:
* 72a3adb16b
* 51dd2293ca
Inspired-by: KiranMantha <kiranv.mantha@gmail.com>
Inspired-by: Lucas Larroche <lucas@larroche.com>
Co-authored-by: Beowulf <beowulf@beocode.eu>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7906
Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Beowulf <beowulf@beocode.eu>
Co-authored-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
add links to the comments that appear in issue when changing milestones and projects
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7992
Reviewed-by: Beowulf <beowulf@beocode.eu>
Co-authored-by: Robert Wolff <mahlzahn@posteo.de>
Co-committed-by: Robert Wolff <mahlzahn@posteo.de>
Two pull requests were merged at the same time
- https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7699
- https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7508
And added conflicting structs ActionRun modules/structs. That broke
the forgejo development branch and a quick fix was made to resolve
the name conflict.
- https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8066
However that creates an undesirable duplication of two structures that
serve the same purpose but are different.
- Remove RepoActionRun and replace it with ActionRun
- convert.ToActionRun has one more argument, the doer, because it
is determined differently in the context of webhooks or API
### Tests
- No need because the two pull requests involved already have good coverage.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8250
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Reviewed-by: klausfyhn <klausfyhn@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Christopher Besch <mail@chris-besch.com>
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Co-committed-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
The text should be two sentences, or at the very least separated by a semicolon rather than a comma.
## 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
- 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 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] 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.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8197
Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: John Veness <john-codeberg@jveness.co.uk>
Co-committed-by: John Veness <john-codeberg@jveness.co.uk>
## Motivation
The GLTF (`.gltf`, `.glb`) 3D model format is very popular for game development and visual productions.
For an indie game studio, it would be convenient for a team to view textured 3D models directly from the Forgejo interface (otherwise they need to be downloaded and opened). [Perforce](https://www.perforce.com/products/helix-dam), [Diversion](https://www.diversion.dev/), and GitHub all have this capability to differing extents.
Some discussion on 3D file support here: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/5188
## Changes
Adds a model viewer similar to [GitHub STL viewer](https://github.com/assimp/assimp/blob/master/test/models/STL/Spider_ascii.stl) for `.glb` model files, and lays some groundwork to support future files. Uses the [model-viewer](https://modelviewer.dev/) library by Google and three.js. The model viewer is interactive and can be rotated and scaled.
## How to Test
1) Create a new repository or use an existing one.
2) Upload a `.glb` file such as `tests/testdata/data/viewer/Unicode❤♻Test.glb` (CC0 1.0 Universal)
3) View the file in the repository.
- Similar to image files, the 3D model should be rendered in a viewer.
- Use mouse clicks to turn and zoom.
## Licenses
Libraries used for this change include three.js and @google/model-viewer, which are MIT and Apache-2.0 licenses respectively. Both of these are compatible with Forgejo's GPL3.0 license.
## Future Plans
1) `.gltf` was not attempted because it is a multiple file format, referencing other files in the same directory. Still need to experiment with this to see if it can work. `.glb` is a single file containing a `.gltf` and all of its other file/texture dependencies so was easier to implement.
2) The PR diff still shows the model as an unviewable bin file, but clicking the "View File" button takes you to a view screen where this model viewer is used. It would be nice to view the before and after of the model in two side-by-side model viewers, akin to reviewing a change in an image.
3) Also inserted stubs for adding contexts for GLTF, STL, OBJ, and 3MF. These ultimately don't do anything yet as only `.glb` files can be detected by the type sniffer of all of these.
## 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
- I added test coverage for checking GLB file content using the first few bytes.
- [x] in their respective `typesniffer_test.go` for unit 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
- [ ] 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.
<!--start release-notes-assistant-->
## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- User Interface features
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8111): <!--number 8111 --><!--line 0 --><!--description YWRkIG1vZGVsIHZpZXdlciBmb3IgYC5nbGJgIChHTFRGKSBtb2RlbCBpbiBmaWxlIHZpZXc=-->add model viewer for `.glb` (GLTF) model in file view<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8111
Reviewed-by: oliverpool <oliverpool@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Alex Smith <amsmith.pro@pm.me>
Co-committed-by: Alex Smith <amsmith.pro@pm.me>
