Tag creation/deletion was triggering push webhooks even when branch
filters were configured, causing unintended pipeline executions.
This change modifies the branch filter logic to check the full ref
name directly instead of first determining if it's a "branch" event.
Fixes: Tag events now properly respect branch filters
- Add getPayloadRef() function to extract full ref names
- Update PrepareWebhook() to use direct ref matching
- Prevents refs/tags/* from matching refs/heads/* filters
Closes#35449
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
1. make our "route group pattern match" also update chi's RoutePattern
2. fix incorrect "NotFound" call in conda package
3. make ".flex-item .flex-item-main" has a general gap, then no need to
use `tw` tricks
4. improve the "test webhook" UI
The "autofocus" was abused or misbehaved:
1. When users visit a page but they are not going to change a field,
then the field shouldn't get "autofocus"
* the "auth" / "user" page: in most cases, users do not want to change
the names
* see also the GitHub's "settings" page behavior.
2. There shouldn't be duplicate "autofocus" inputs in most cases, only
the first one focuses
3. When a panel is shown, the "autofocus" should get focus
* "add ssh key" panel
This PR fixes all these problems and by the way remove duplicate
"isElemHidden" function.
This PR tries to finally fix the bug mentioned in #30011 and #15504,
where the user repo limit is checked when creating a repo in an
organization.
Fix#30011
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: TheFox0x7 <thefox0x7@gmail.com>
Follow #33127Fix#8649, fix#639
This is a complete solution. A repo unit could be set to:
* Anonymous read (non-signed-in user)
* Everyone read (signed-in user)
* Everyone write (wiki-only)
1. Add some "render-content" classes to "markup" elements when the
content is rendered
2. Use correct "markup" wrapper for "preview" (but not set that class on
the tab)
3. Remove incorrect "markup" class from LFS file view, because there is
no markup content
* "edit-diff" is also removed because it does nothing
5. Use "initPdfViewer" for PDF viewer
6. Remove incorrect "content" class from milestone markup
7. Init all ".markup" elements by new init framework
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Extract from #33320
This PR uses a map instead of a struct to store webhook event
information. It removes many duplicated functions and makes the logic
clearer.
## Solves
Currently for rules to re-order them you have to alter the creation
date. so you basicly have to delete and recreate them in the right
order. This is more than just inconvinient ...
## Solution
Add a new col for prioritization
## Demo WebUI Video
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/92182a31-9705-4ac5-b6e3-9bb74108cbd1
---
*Sponsored by Kithara Software GmbH*
This introduces a new flag `BlockAdminMergeOverride` on the branch
protection rules that prevents admins/repo owners from bypassing branch
protection rules and merging without approvals or failing status checks.
Fixes#17131
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Part of #27700
Removes all URLs from translation strings to easy up changing them in
the future and to exclude people injecting malicious URLs through
translations. First measure as long as #24402 is out of scope.
When transferring repositories that have issues linked to a project
board to another organization, the issues remain associated with the
original project board. This causes the columns in the project board to
become bugged, making it difficult to move other issues in or out of the
affected columns. As a solution, I removed the issue relations since the
other organization does not have this project table.
Fix for #31538
Co-authored-by: Jason Song <i@wolfogre.com>
Fixes#22722
### Problem
Currently, it is not possible to force push to a branch with branch
protection rules in place. There are often times where this is necessary
(CI workflows/administrative tasks etc).
The current workaround is to rename/remove the branch protection,
perform the force push, and then reinstate the protections.
### Solution
Provide an additional section in the branch protection rules to allow
users to specify which users with push access can also force push to the
branch. The default value of the rule will be set to `Disabled`, and the
UI is intuitive and very similar to the `Push` section.
It is worth noting in this implementation that allowing force push does
not override regular push access, and both will need to be enabled for a
user to force push.
This applies to manual force push to a remote, and also in Gitea UI
updating a PR by rebase (which requires force push)
This modifies the `BranchProtection` API structs to add:
- `enable_force_push bool`
- `enable_force_push_whitelist bool`
- `force_push_whitelist_usernames string[]`
- `force_push_whitelist_teams string[]`
- `force_push_whitelist_deploy_keys bool`
### Updated Branch Protection UI:
<img width="943" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/79623665/7491899c-d816-45d5-be84-8512abd156bf">
### Pull Request `Update branch by Rebase` option enabled with source
branch `test` being a protected branch:
<img width="1038" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/79623665/57ead13e-9006-459f-b83c-7079e6f4c654">
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
1. There are already global "unit consts", no need to use context data, which is fragile
2. Remove the "String()" method from "unit", it would only cause rendering problems in templates
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Remove and forbid [.text()](https://api.jquery.com/text/). Tested some,
but not all functionality, but I think these are pretty safe
replacements.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
`overflow-wrap: anywhere` is a superior alternative to `word-wrap:
break-word` and we were already setting it in the class. I tested a few
cases, all look good.
This PR split the `Board` into two parts. One is the struct has been
renamed to `Column` and the second we have a `Template Type`.
But to make it easier to review, this PR will not change the database
schemas, they are just renames. The database schema changes could be in
future PRs.
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: yp05327 <576951401@qq.com>
When creating a repo, the "FORCE_PRIVATE" config option should be
respected, `readonly` doesn't work for checkbox, so it should use
`disabled` attribute.
