When deleting a closed issue, we should update both `NumIssues`and
`NumClosedIssues`, or `NumOpenIssues`(`= NumIssues -NumClosedIssues`)
will be wrong. It's the same for pull requests.
Releated to #21557.
Alse fixed two harmless problems:
- The SQL to check issue/PR total numbers is wrong, that means it will
update the numbers even if they are correct.
- Replace legacy `num_issues = num_issues + 1` operations with
`UpdateRepoIssueNumbers`.
Change all license headers to comply with REUSE specification.
Fix#16132
Co-authored-by: flynnnnnnnnnn <flynnnnnnnnnn@github>
Co-authored-by: John Olheiser <john.olheiser@gmail.com>
Fix#20456
At some point during the 1.17 cycle abbreviated refishs to issue
branches started breaking. This is likely due serious inconsistencies in
our management of refs throughout Gitea - which is a bug needing to be
addressed in a different PR. (Likely more than one)
We should try to use non-abbreviated `fullref`s as much as possible.
That is where a user has inputted a abbreviated `refish` we should add
`refs/heads/` if it is `branch` etc. I know people keep writing and
merging PRs that remove prefixes from stored content but it is just
wrong and it keeps causing problems like this. We should only remove the
prefix at the time of
presentation as the prefix is the only way of knowing umambiguously and
permanently if the `ref` is referring to a `branch`, `tag` or `commit` /
`SHA`. We need to make it so that every ref has the appropriate prefix,
and probably also need to come up with some definitely unambiguous way
of storing `SHA`s if they're used in a `ref` or `refish` field. We must
not store a potentially
ambiguous `refish` as a `ref`. (Especially when referring a `tag` -
there is no reason why users cannot create a `branch` with the same
short name as a `tag` and vice versa and any attempt to prevent this
will fail. You can even create a `branch` and a
`tag` that matches the `SHA` pattern.)
To that end in order to fix this bug, when parsing issue templates check
the provided `Ref` (here a `refish` because almost all users do not know
or understand the subtly), if it does not start with `refs/` add the
`BranchPrefix` to it. This allows people to make their templates refer
to a `tag` but not to a `SHA` directly. (I don't think that is
particularly unreasonable but if people disagree I can make the `refish`
be checked to see if it matches the `SHA` pattern.)
Next we need to handle the issue links that are already written. The
links here are created with `git.RefURL`
Here we see there is a bug introduced in #17551 whereby the provided
`ref` argument can be double-escaped so we remove the incorrect external
escape. (The escape added in #17551 is in the right place -
unfortunately I missed that the calling function was doing the wrong
thing.)
Then within `RefURL()` we check if an unprefixed `ref` (therefore
potentially a `refish`) matches the `SHA` pattern before assuming that
is actually a `commit` - otherwise is assumed to be a `branch`. This
will handle most of the problem cases excepting the very unusual cases
where someone has deliberately written a `branch` to look like a `SHA1`.
But please if something is called a `ref` or interpreted as a `ref` make
it a full-ref before storing or using it. By all means if something is a
`branch` assume the prefix is removed but always add it back in if you
are using it as a `ref`. Stop storing abbreviated `branch` names and
`tag` names - which are `refish` as a `ref`. It will keep on causing
problems like this.
Fix#20456
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
This PR adds a context parameter to a bunch of methods. Some helper
`xxxCtx()` methods got replaced with the normal name now.
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Fix#19513
This PR introduce a new db method `InTransaction(context.Context)`,
and also builtin check on `db.TxContext` and `db.WithTx`.
There is also a new method `db.AutoTx` has been introduced but could be used by other PRs.
`WithTx` will always open a new transaction, if a transaction exist in context, return an error.
`AutoTx` will try to open a new transaction if no transaction exist in context.
That means it will always enter a transaction if there is no error.
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
When actions besides "delete" are performed on issues, the milestone
counter is updated. However, since deleting issues goes through a
different code path, the associated milestone's count wasn't being
updated, resulting in inaccurate counts until another issue in the same
milestone had a non-delete action performed on it.
I verified this change fixes the inaccurate counts using a local docker
build.
Fixes#21254
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
* Check if project has the same repository id with issue when assign project to issue
* Check if issue's repository id match project's repository id
* Add more permission checking
* Remove invalid argument
* Fix errors
* Add generic check
* Remove duplicated check
* Return error + add check for new issues
* Apply suggestions from code review
Co-authored-by: KN4CK3R <admin@oldschoolhack.me>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <williamzijl7@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: KN4CK3R <admin@oldschoolhack.me>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
* Move access and repo permission to models/perm/access
* fix test
* fix git test
* Move functions sequence
* Some improvements per @KN4CK3R and @delvh
* Move issues related code to models/issues
* Move some issues related sub package
* Merge
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Rename some files
The review request feature was added in https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/10756,
where the doer got explicitly excluded from available reviewers. I don't see a
functionality or security related reason to forbid this case.
As shown by GitHubs implementation, it may be useful to self-request a review,
to be reminded oneselves about reviewing, while communicating to team mates that a
review is missing.
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Add new feature to delete issues and pulls via API
Co-authored-by: fnetx <git@fralix.ovh>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <williamzijl7@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Unfortunately #17643 prevented all propagation of ErrDependenciesLeft meaning
that dependency errors that prevent closing of issues get swallowed.
This PR restores propagation of the error but instead swallows the error in the
places where it needs to be swallowed.
Fix#18223
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Some refactors related repository model
* Move more methods out of repository
* Move repository into models/repo
* Fix test
* Fix test
* some improvements
* Remove unnecessary function
* DBContext is just a Context
This PR removes some of the specialness from the DBContext and makes it context
This allows us to simplify the GetEngine code to wrap around any context in future
and means that we can change our loadRepo(e Engine) functions to simply take contexts.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* fix unit tests
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* another place that needs to set the initial context
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* avoid race
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* change attachment error
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Fixes#14187: mention handling extracted from email notification code
Fixes#14013: add notification for mentions in pull request code comments
Fixes#13450: Not receiving any emails with setting "Only Email on Mention"
Add team support for review request
Block #11355
Signed-off-by: a1012112796 <1012112796@qq.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* Add field with isIssueWriter to front end
* Make branch field editable
* Switch frontend to form and POST from javascript
* Add /issue/id/ref endpoint to routes
* Use UpdateIssueTitle model to change ref in backend
* Removed crossreference check and adding comments on branch change
* Use ref returned from POST to update the field
* Prevent calling loadRepo from models/
* Branch/tag refreshed without page reload
* Remove filter for empty branch name
* Add clear option to tag list as well
* Delete button translation and coloring
* Fix for not showing selected branch name in new issue
* Check that branch is not being changed on a PR
* Change logic
* Notification when changing issue ref
* Fix for renamed permission parameter
* Fix for failing build
* Apply suggestions from code review
Co-authored-by: zeripath <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Gitea <gitea@fake.local>
Co-authored-by: zeripath <art27@cantab.net>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: techknowlogick <techknowlogick@gitea.io>
* Properly generate ref URLs
Tags used to not generate correct URLs (src/branch/tags/1.0.0 instead of
src/tags/1.0.0).
Also cleans up some code around it with the created helper functions.
* Fix formatting and create migration
* Add copyright head to utils_test
* Use a raw query for the ref migration
* Remove semicolon
* Quote column and table names in migration SQL
* Change || to CONCAT, since MSSQL does not support ||
* Make migration engine aware
* Add missing import
* Move ref EndName and URL to the issue service
* Fix tests
* Add test for commit refs
* Update issue.go
* Use the right command for building JavaScript bundles
* Prepare for merge
* Check for refs/* before prepending in migration
* Update services/issue/issue_test.go
* Update modules/git/utils_test.go
Co-authored-by: techknowlogick <techknowlogick@gitea.io>
Co-authored-by: techknowlogick <matti@mdranta.net>
* add request review feature in pull request
add a way to notify specific reviewers to review like github , by add or delet a special type
review . The acton is is similar to Assign , so many code reuse the function and items of
Assignee, but the meaning and result is different.
The Permission style is is similar to github, that only writer can add a review request from Reviewers,
but the poster can recall and remove a review request after a reviwer has revied even if he don't have
Write Premission. only manager , the poster and reviewer of a request review can remove it.
The reviewers can be requested to review contain all readers for private repo , for public, contain
all writers and watchers.
The offical Review Request will block merge if Reject can block it.
an other change: add ui otify for Assignees.
Co-authored-by: guillep2k <18600385+guillep2k@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
Signed-off-by: a1012112796 <1012112796@qq.com>
* new change
* add placeholder string
* do some changes follow #10238 to add review requests num on lists also
change icon for review requests to eye
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
