Extend the maximum length of comment.treepath from 255 to 4000
characters.
All databases supported by Gitea allow VARCHAR fields of 4000, so
compatibility is ensured. Git itself does not impose a strict limit on
path length. On Windows, the `core.longpaths` setting has already been
enabled to handle long file paths.
Fix#33716
---------
Signed-off-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
This PR upgrade xorm to v1.3.10 which fixed a bug when both `longtext
json` tags in the struct field. The `longtext` will be ignored and
`json` will be considered as `text`.
A migration has been introduced to modify the column directly to
longtext. And another two columns should also be migrated from text to
longtext.
All these changes only affect mysql database because for other databases
Gitea supported, text is the same as longtext.
Fix#27244Fix#34764Fix#35042
Fix#880
Design:
1. A global setting `security.TWO_FACTOR_AUTH`.
* To support org-level config, we need to introduce a better "owner
setting" system first (in the future)
2. A user without 2FA can login and may explore, but can NOT read or
write to any repositories via API/web.
3. Keep things as simple as possible.
* This option only aggressively suggest users to enable their 2FA at the
moment, it does NOT guarantee that users must have 2FA before all other
operations, it should be good enough for real world use cases.
* Some details and tests could be improved in the future since this
change only adds a check and seems won't affect too much.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Fix#2616
This PR adds a new sort option for exclusive labels.
For exclusive labels, a new property is exposed called "order", while in
the UI options are populated automatically in the `Sort` column (see
screenshot below) for each exclusive label scope.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Follow #33127
This PR add backend logic and test for "anonymous access", it shares the
same logic as "everyone access", so not too much change.
By the way, split `SettingsPost` into small functions to make it easier
to make frontend-related changes in the future.
Next PR will add frontend support for "anonymous access"
When there are over 5M records on `action` table, the heatmap on
dashboard is very slow as below SQL.
```
database duration=1.8881s db.sql="SELECT created_unix DIV 900 * 900 AS timestamp, count(user_id) as contributions FROM `action` WHERE user_id=? AND act_user_id=? AND (created_unix > ?) GROUP BY timestamp ORDER BY timestamp"
```
This PR add a new index for `action` table with columns `user_id`,
`act_user_id` and `created_unix` so that this query will become about 6
times faster than before.
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Resolve#32341
~Depends on #27151~
- [x] It will display a checkbox of deleting the head branch on the pull
request view page when starting an auto-merge task.
- [x] Add permission check before deleting the branch
- [x] Add delete branch comment for those closing pull requests because
of head branch or base branch was deleted.
- [x] Merge `RetargetChildrenOnMerge` and `AddDeletePRBranchComment`
into `service.DeleteBranch`.
Redesign the time tracker side bar, and add "time estimate" support (in "1d 2m" format)
Closes#23112
---------
Co-authored-by: stuzer05 <stuzer05@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Yarden Shoham <hrsi88@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
## 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*
Index SQL: `CREATE INDEX u_s_uu ON notification(user_id, status,
updated_unix);`
The naming follows `action.go` in the same dir.
I am unsure which version I should add SQL to the migration folder, so I
have not modified it.
Fix#32390
Use zero instead of 9999-12-31 for deadline
Fix#32291
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
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>
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>
The target_url is necessary for the UI, but missed in
commit_status_summary table. This PR fix it.
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
