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>
## Checklist
- [x] go to the last cherry-pick PR (forgejo/forgejo#7965) to figure out how far it went: [gitea@9d4ebc1f2c](9d4ebc1f2c)
- [x] cherry-pick and open PR (forgejo/forgejo#8040)
- [ ] have the PR pass the CI
- end-to-end (specially important if there are actions related changes)
- [ ] add `run-end-to-end` label
- [ ] check the result
- [ ] write release notes
- [ ] assign reviewers
- [ ] 48h later, last call
- merge 1 hour after the last call
## Legend
- ❓ - No decision about the commit has been made.
- 🍒 - The commit has been cherry picked.
- ⏩ - The commit has been skipped.
- 💡 - The commit has been skipped, but should be ported to Forgejo.
- ✍️ - The commit has been skipped, and a port to Forgejo already exists.
## Commits
- 🍒 [`gitea`](50d9565088) -> [`forgejo`](c3e6eab732) Add sort option recentclose for issues and pulls ([gitea#34525](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34525))
## TODO
- 💡 [`gitea`](d5bbaee64e) Retain issue sort type when a keyword search is introduced ([gitea#34559](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34559))
UI: Small bat might be nice. Test needed? Do we've frontend tests covering the search?
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](82ea2387e4) Always use an empty line to separate the commit message and trailer ([gitea#34512](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34512))
Needs merge
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](74858dc5ae) Fix line-button issue after file selection in file tree ([gitea#34574](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34574))
Frontend: Makes it sense to pick/port ui logic in *.ts files?
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](7149c9c55d) Fix doctor deleting orphaned issues attachments ([gitea#34142](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34142))
Doctor: seems useful.
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](0cec4b84e2) Fix actions skipped commit status indicator ([gitea#34507](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34507))
Actions: Might benefit from additional tests.
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](4cb0c641ce) Add "View workflow file" to Actions list page ([gitea#34538](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34538))
Actions: Needs tests
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](b0936f4f41) Do not mutate incoming options to RenderUserSearch and SearchUsers ([gitea#34544](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34544))
Nice refactoring but needs manual merge.
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](498088c053) Add webhook assigning test and fix possible bug ([gitea#34420](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34420))
Integrationtest has conflicts needs merge.
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](24a51059d7) Fix possible nil description of pull request when migrating from CodeCommit ([gitea#34541](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34541))
Is this relevant to forgejo? Did not find the place to apply this small change.
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](688da55f54) Split GetLatestCommitStatus as two functions ([gitea#34535](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34535))
Merge required.
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](ab9691291d) Don't display error log when .git-blame-ignore-revs doesn't exist ([gitea#34457](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34457))
Unsure wheter this affects forgejo. Tests missing.
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](11ee7ff3bf) fix: return 201 Created for CreateVariable API responses ([gitea#34517](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34517))
Actions: This is marked as breaking the api. Pls think about whether this breaking change iss needed & how this impact api-version-increase.
The corresponding clinet change can be found here: https://gitea.com/gitea/go-sdk/pulls/713/files
------
- 💡 [`gitea`](9b295e984a) Actions list ([gitea#34530](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34530))
Actions: Regression from https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34337 Part of https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7909
------
## Skipped
- ⏩ [`gitea`](bb6377d080) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin
------
- ⏩ [`gitea`](07d802a815) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin
------
- ⏩ [`gitea`](c6e2093f42) Clean up "file-view" related styles ([gitea#34558](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34558))
- gitea ui specific specific
------
- ⏩ [`gitea`](9f10885b21) Refactor commit reader ([gitea#34542](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34542))
- gitea refactor specific
------
<details>
<summary><h2>Stats</h2></summary>
<br>
Between [`gitea@9d4ebc1f2c`](9d4ebc1f2c) and [`gitea@d5bbaee64e`](d5bbaee64e), **18** commits have been reviewed. We picked **1**, skipped **4**, and decided to port **13**.
</details>
Co-authored-by: Markus Amshove <scm@amshove.org>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8040
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Michael Jerger <michael.jerger@meissa-gmbh.de>
Co-committed-by: Michael Jerger <michael.jerger@meissa-gmbh.de>
See https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/4801#issuecomment-5094525 and #8152 for more context.
The current implementation is limited to self-hosted actions and buggy as soon as multiple repos are involved, like for the homepage (because each permission must be fetched individually).
Ideally this feature should work for all kind of status (with some setting indicating which collaborator can access with status). Probably inside the `git_model.ParseCommitsWithStatus` function.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8177
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: oliverpool <git@olivier.pfad.fr>
Co-committed-by: oliverpool <git@olivier.pfad.fr>
- If a review was requested from a deleted team, use the ghost team for the comment aggregator.
- ResolvesCodeberg/Community#1952
- Unit test added.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7987
Reviewed-by: Beowulf <beowulf@beocode.eu>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
The only parameter that is ever used is a single directory, make it that only instead of a more complex option structure.
Remove tests.AddFixtures that was the simpler form because it is now redundant.
---
Backporting to v11.0 will help with automated backporting of bug fixes in need of custom made fixtures.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7648
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Co-committed-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
- Consider the following scenario: a private repository in an organization with a team that has no specific access to that repository. Members of that team are still able to visit the repository because of entries in the `access` table.
- Consider this specific scenario for the gathering of issues for project tables.
- Unit test added
- Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#7217
- Ref: forgejo/forgejo#6843
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7270
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
- The security patch of forgejo/forgejo#6843 fixed the issue where project boards loaded all issues without considering if the doer actually had permission to view that issue. Within that patch the call to `Issues` was modified to include this permission checking.
- The query being generated was not entirely correct. Issues in public repositories weren't considered correctly (partly the fault of not setting `AllPublic` unconditionally) in the cause an authenticated user loaded the project.
- This is now fixed by setting `AllPublic` unconditionally and subsequently fixing the `Issue` function to ensure that the combination of setting `AllPublic` and `User` generates the correct query, by combining the permission check and issues in public repositories as one `AND` query.
- Added unit testing.
- Added integration testing.
- ResolvesCodeberg/Community#1809
- Regression of https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/6843
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7143
Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Closes: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/6042
Continuation of: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/6284
Replaces: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/6285
Context: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/6284#issuecomment-2518599
Create a new type of comment: `CommentTypeAggregator`
Replaces the grouping of labels and review request in a single place: the comment aggregator
The whole list of comments is "scanned", if they can get aggregated (diff of time < 60secs, same poster, open / close issue, add / del labels, add /del review req), they are added to the aggregator.
Once needed, the list of all the aggregated comments are replaced with a single aggregated comment containing all the data required.
In templates, have a specific HTML rendering part for the comment aggregator, reuse the same rendering as with the other types of comments.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/6523
Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Litchi Pi <litchi.pi@proton.me>
Co-committed-by: Litchi Pi <litchi.pi@proton.me>
- Do an access check when loading issues for a project column, currently
this is not done and exposes the title, labels and existence of a
private issue that the viewer of the project board may not have access
to.
- The number of issues cannot be calculated in a efficient manner
and stored in the database because their number may vary depending on
the visibility of the repositories participating in the project. The
previous implementation used the pre-calculated numbers stored in each
project, which did not reflect that potential variation.
- The code is derived from https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/22865
Keep the setting of comment.Issues from the refactor. It is cheap and
potentially saves loading the issue again.
Former title: Some small refactors (#33144)
(cherry picked from commit d3083d21981f9445cf7570956a1fdedfc8578b56)
Conflicts:
models/issues/comment_list.go
models/issues/issue_list.go
routers/web/repo/issue_view.go
## Overview
Hi all, I'm a first-time contributor to Forgejo. I was looking for something interesting to contribute and the first thing that caught my attention was https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/6043, a request for an enhancement to include "issue previews" when publishing links to social media platforms. As a bit of background, the way these platforms work is that they search for meta tags in the posted link's content, and if they find a meta `og:image` (along with other meta tags) they'll pull the image to include in the social media post. Forgejo currently provides an `og:image` tag but it just renders the repository or repository-owner's avatar.
This PR will render `og:image` for an issue or PR into a link to `{...}/summary-card`, which is a dynamically generated image that contains a summary of the issue.
## Design Notes
### Rendering / Rasterization
The tricky part of solving this problem is rendering an image that combines some text, some images, and some layout elements. To address this, I've created a `card` module which allows for a handful of operations:
- Create a new rendered image (a "Card")
- Add a margin to a card
- Split the card, horizontally or vertically, into two pieces with a proportional layout (eg. 70%/30%, as desired), each of which are "Cards" that render into the same root image
- Render text into a card, with line-wrapping and text-alignment capabilities
- Render an image onto a card
- Fetches an external image as safely as possible (for server-side fetch of Gravatar, etc.)
The card module can be reused to create `og:image` summary cards for any object in the future, although obviously it's capabilities are limited. The current implementation is on issues/PRs.
I considered a few alternative approaches before taking this approach, and here's why I rejected those options:
- Provide the summary card as an SVG object which could be rendered much more easily with a template file -- however, support for SVG isn't defined as positive for OpenGraph, and a quick look through some existing implementations suggest that it is not widely supported, if at all
- Rendering as HTML/CSS, or SVG, and then using an external tool to convert into a PNG (or other static) image -- this would be much nicer and easier to implement, but would require tying in some very heavy-weight dependencies
- Rendering using a more sophisticated graphics library, eg. cairo -- also would be nicer and easier to implement, but again a heavy dependency for a small functionality
As a result of the limited capabilities of the new card module, summary cards don't have icons on them (which would require SVG rasterization) or pretty status badges with colors and rounded rects. In the future if better drawing capabilities were added, the graphics could be improved, but it doesn't seem too important.
### External Avatars
In order to rasterize a user's avatar onto the summary card, it might have to be retrieved by the server from the external source (eg. Gravatar). A `fetchExternalImage` routine attempts to do this in the safest way possible to protect the server from any possible security exposure from this; (a) verifying that the content-types are acceptable, (b) ensuring that the file-size and image-size are within the safe bounds that are used for custom avatars, (c) using a very-short timeout to avoid stalling the server if an external dependency is offline.
### Caching
Summary cards are cached after rendered. This has the downside of causing updates to statuses, avatars, titles, etc. being stale on the summary card for the cache TTL. However, during testing I found that some social media engines like Mastodon will cause the summary card to be accessed a significant number of times after being referenced by a post, causing a mini-tornado of requests. The cache compensates for this to avoid server load in this situation.
### Scope
I'm considering out-of-scope:
- Summary cards on other objects (eg. repos, users) can be left for future implementation
## 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 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...~~ n/a, no JS changes
- [x] ~~in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.~~
- [x] ~~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)).~~
- Manual testing
- [x] Access & attach screenshots of both an issue and a pull-request's summary card; see below
- [x] Ensure reasonable (non-crash) behavior of rendering text with glyphs outside the font -- correctly rendered as replacement unicode chars
- [x] Using a public test instance, verify that og:image behavior looks good on platforms like Mastodon and BlueSky
- [x] Bluesky: ✅
- [x] Mastodon: ✅ (Note that the summary card will be requested many times as the post is federated; either each server, or each client, will fetch it itself)
- [x] OpenGraph test site (https://www.opengraph.xyz/): ✅
- [x] Discord: Looks OK ✅; needs "twitter:card" to be set to "summary_large_image" to display the large-scale image, but (a) that's probably annoying to use, (b) probably wrong because it doesn't match Twitter Card's spec for a "photographic image", and (c) don't want to encourage/continue use of vendor-specific tag
- [x] Verify cases with user avatar missing (or autogen), and repo avatar missing (falls back to repo owner avatar)
Pull request summary card:
Issue summary card:
(images to the right are the custom repo avatar, w/ fallback to the repo owner avatar)
### 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.
- OpenGraph capabilities are expected to work in the background without user awareness, and so there is no need for documentation to explain the capabilities for users.
### 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.
- [ ] 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/6053
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
- Instead of having code that relied on the result being sorted (which
wasn't specified in the query and therefore not safe to assume so). Use
a map where it doesn't care if the result that we get from the database
is sorted or not.
- Added unit test.
Functions modifying the labels in the database (DeleteIssueLabel,
NewIssueLabels, NewIssueLabel, ReplaceIssueLabels) need to force
reload them. Instead of:
issue.isLabelsLoaded = false
issue.Labels = nil
if err = issue.LoadLabels(ctx); err != nil {
return err
}
They can now use:
if err = issue.ReloadLabels(ctx); err != nil {
return err
}
When ReplaceIssueLabels calls issue.LoadLabels it was a noop because
issue.isLabelsLoaded is still set to true because of the call to
issue.LoadLabels that was done at the beginning of the function.
(cherry picked from commit f4d3aaeeb9e1b11c5495e4608a3f52f316c35758)
Conflicts:
- modules/charset/charset_test.go
Resolved by manually changing a `=` to `:=`, as per the
original patch. Conflict was due to `require.NoError`.
- Combine review requests comments similairy how labels comments are
combined. If review requests comments were made within 60 seconds of
each other they will be grouped.
- Integration and unit test added.
- Resolves#2774
The Issue and PullRequest list has 3 states:
- open: This lists all open Issues/PullRequests
- closed: This lists all closed Issues/PullRequests
- all: This lists all open and closed Issues/PullRequests
If you want to get to the all state, you need to click Open while in open state or Closed while in closed state, which is very unintuitive. This PR adss a third button to get to this state.
I'm not sure if the eye icon fits well, but I couldn't find a better one.
Tests will be added once #4124 is merged.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/4125
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: JakobDev <jakobdev@gmx.de>
Co-committed-by: JakobDev <jakobdev@gmx.de>
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
If the assign the pull request review to a team, it did not show the
members of the team in the "requested_reviewers" field, so the field was
null. As a solution, I added the team members to the array.
fix#31764
(cherry picked from commit 94cca8846e7d62c8a295d70c8199d706dfa60e5c)
Resolves https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/26996
Added default sorting for milestones by name.
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
---
Conflict resolution: trivial, was due to the improvement made to 'the due
date sorting' strings.
(cherry picked from commit e8d4b7a8b198eca3b0bd117efb422d7d7cac93fe)
