**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10927
Continuation of #10598Closes#7254
Implement repo granular watch selection
I adopted a lot of the frontend from #10598 while redoing the entire back-end. I propose this new model:
- Remove the WatchMode enum.
- Add the WatchSelection struct, which represents the granular selection. Notice that there is no `watching` bool. I tried very hard to keep the structure as simple and redundancy-free as possible. Therefore, people not watching a repo at all either don't have a watch record or one with an entirely unselected WatchSelection struct.
- Add the WatchSource enum. It replaces the WatchMode enum and has a single purpose: determine whether a watch was explicitly or automatically initiated.
Notice that replacing this
```go
And("`watch`.mode<>?", WatchModeDont).
```
with this is correct:
```go
And(
builder.Or(
builder.Eq{"`watch`.watch_selection_issues": true},
builder.Eq{"`watch`.watch_selection_pull_requests": true},
builder.Eq{"`watch`.watch_selection_releases": true},
),
).
```
That's because there are four modes: dont, none, auto and normal. When `<>` with dont, we look for auto and normal, because there are no records with none. Therefore, the old code looks for records that indicate watching. The code I replaced this with does so, too, just more granular.
Also notice that I've prepared a future `user preset` in a few places. See below for a little more info on that.
## Next PR
I plan to continue working on this. I want to implement a `user preset` option. The user sets that `user preset` in her settings and may use them in any repo.
<details>
- rename account settings to account and notifications
- user preset (always use this preset for newly accessible repos (according to AutoWatchOnChanges and AutoWatchNewRepos))
</details>
## Further PRs
- make api able to granular watch
- move (email) notifications to new notifications tab
Co-authored-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-authored-by: pat-s <patrick.schratz@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: #10927
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
(cherry picked from commit 8770ffc848)
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/13258Close#13250
ExtraLinesCount was not send to reply template
### Tests for Go changes
(can be removed for JavaScript changes)
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [X] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I ran...
- [X] `make pr-go` before pushing
### Documentation
- [X] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
Co-authored-by: steven.guiheux <steven.guiheux@ovhcloud.com>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/13303
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
**Backport:** https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/13263
By default, when you create an `exec.CommandContext` in Go, when the context is cancelled or timed out, Go will SIGKILL the subprocess which does not allow the subprocess to perform any cleanup work. As some git operations in Forgejo will be linked to the current HTTP context, and the current HTTP context will be closed when the HTTP client disconnects, this can theoretically cause SIGKILLs when locks are being held.
This PR contains two fixes:
- Change the behaviour of all subprocesses that Forgejo creates to use a graceful termination, SIGTERM'ing the process, and then SIGKILL'ing it after a timeout.
- Fixes a bug where previously all subprocesses are setup in a process group (by 1d04e8641d), but they were never *killed* in a process group, preventing child processes from receiving these termination signals. Both SIGTERM and SIGKILL are sent to the process group.
Introduces new configuration setting which controls subcommand graceful timeouts. If a subprocess does not shutdown from SIGTERM within `[server].SUBPROCESS_TERMINATE_GRACE` (default 5 seconds), then an error will be logged, and the process will be SIGKILL'd. The error is:
```
2026/07/01 08:31:20 modules/log/init.go:38:func2() [E] Subprocess pid=3790963 (/nix/store/c0277k5giric1mn9dklllavbzvxl6hzb-git-2.53.0/bin/git blame --porcelain 8ee7e7c32b -- options/locale/locale_en-US.ini) failed to terminate from SIGTERM after grace period 0s, and was sent SIGKILL. The subprocess termination may leave incomplete state on the server, such as lock files. `[server].SUBPROCESS_TERMINATE_GRACE` can be changed to give subprocesses more time to cleanly exit.
```
(This was produced on a live server by setting SUBPROCESS_TERMINATE_GRACE to zero seconds, loading a page that does a `git blame`, and hitting escape in the browser quickly.)
### Tests for Go changes
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I ran...
- [x] `make pr-go` before pushing
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- Will create a documentation PR with new config settings.
- [ ] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [x] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change.
- [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change.
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/13274
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Closes https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/6093
This PR adds support for **multi-line review comments** on pull requests, allowing reviewers to select a range of lines in diffs instead of only a single line — similar to GitHub's implementation.
### Tests for Go changes
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [X] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [X] `make pr-go` before pushing
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12582
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#12436
Uppercase the token before verification as verification is case-sensitive. Some mail clients might've lower cased.
Co-authored-by: Abidos <abdullah.sowilah@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12460
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
While developing tests for #12092, I came across a case where making a comment on a single-commit doesn't include the correct diff for the comment. This is because code comment placement occurs between the PR's base and the commit being viewed, but, that diff could be different from the commit's parent to the commit, which is what is being viewed on a single-commit diff.
Similar to #12055, this PR changes code comments to be more precise in their diff generation by providing the backend with both the base commit (`before_commit_id`) and head commit (`after_commit_id`) currently being viewed. As a result, the diffs attached to comments should exactly match the diffs being viewed by the user when the comment was placed.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). 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 for Go changes
- 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 ran...
- [x] `make pr-go` before pushing
### 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] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change.
- [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12107
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
With the completion of #12015, when a comment is left on a changed line in a pull request, we track the comment against the line of code with `git blame` and then identify where it currently is in any diff with `git blame --reverse`. However, this strategy only works for the *modified* lines of code -- eg. the `+...` in diffs, and not the `-...` in diffs. The reason is that `git blame --reverse` can't track a line of code's location past the commit that it was removed in.
To permit comments that are left on lines of code that are removed to appear correctly in the UI, a separate approach is required for those comments. This PR performs two major changes, which have been complex to figure out, but are reasonably easy to understand:
- When a comment is placed on a removed line in a PR, perform a `git blame --reverse` from the PR's base to the currently viewed commit, and use this information to record in the comment:
- the **last commit that the line of code existed in** (stored in the `commit_sha` field)
- the **line of code as of that commit** (stored in the `line` field, negative, to indicate that the comment is on a removal).
- the **patch** where the comment was placed (stored in the field `patch`); existing functionality unchanged in this PR
- When viewing any diff in the PR, for each comment on a removal, perform a diff from the `commit_sha` (last commit that the line of code existed in) to the current commit being viewed, and verify that within that diff the left-hand-side line removal still exists at the same line of code in the diff, by comparing the current diff with the stored patch.
- If present, place the commit in the UI at the line number.
- If the line of code no longer exists in the diff at that point (for example, it was removed, commented upon, and then re-added in a later commit), then the comment is considered outdated and isn't displayed.
The algorithm used for marking a comment as "outdated" is also updated to use this approach.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). 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 for Go changes
- 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 ran...
- [x] `make pr-go` before pushing
### 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] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change.
- [ ] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12092
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
One of the security patches released 2026-03-09 [fixed a vulnerability](!11513 (commit d1c7b04d09)) caused by a misapplication of Go `case` statements, where the implementation would have been correct if Go `case` statements automatically fall through to the next case block, but they do not. This PR adds a semgrep rule which detects any empty `case` statement and raises an error, in order to prevent this coding mistake in the future.
For example, code like this will now trigger a build error:
```go
switch setting.Protocol {
case setting.HTTPUnix:
case setting.FCGI:
case setting.FCGIUnix:
default:
defaultLocalURL := string(setting.Protocol) + "://"
}
```
Example error:
```
cmd/web.go
❯❯❱ semgrep.config.forgejo-switch-empty-case
switch has a case block with no content. This is treated as "break" by Go, but developers may
confuse it for "fallthrough". To fix this error, disambiguate by using "break" or
"fallthrough".
279┆ switch setting.Protocol {
280┆ case setting.HTTPUnix:
281┆ case setting.FCGI:
282┆ case setting.FCGIUnix:
283┆ default:
284┆ defaultLocalURL := string(setting.Protocol) + "://"
285┆ if setting.HTTPAddr == "0.0.0.0" {
286┆ defaultLocalURL += "localhost"
287┆ } else {
288┆ defaultLocalURL += setting.HTTPAddr
```
As described in the error output, this error can be fixed by explicitly listing `break` (the real Go behaviour, to do nothing in the block), or by listing `fallthrough` (if the intent was to fall through).
All existing code triggering this detection has been changed to `break` (or, rarely, irrelevant cases have been removed), which should maintain the same code functionality. While performing this fixup, a light analysis was performed on each case and they *appeared* correct, but with ~65 cases I haven't gone into extreme depth.
Tests are present for the semgrep rule in `.semgrep/tests/go.go`.
## 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).
### 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
- [ ] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change.
- [x] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/11593
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Remove recipients that are not active (e.g. done by moderation or
organizational reasons) and those that have the permi ssion to read
releases on that repository.
Fixes#10155
When participants are displayed, don't include those that only have made a pending review. Those should not yet be revealed as participants.
Apart from adding automated tests, this is the manual verification process I've followed:
1. Set up three users
2. User 1 creates a repository, then creates a pull request adding a new file
3. User 2 creates a new code comment but doesn't not publish the review, shows as pending.
4. User 3 creates a new code comment and publishes the review.
5. From everyone's perspective the number of participants is: 2. And, the participants displayed in the list are 1 and 3. User 2, which hasn't yet published the review is not displayed.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10528
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: luisadame <luisadame@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: luisadame <luisadame@noreply.codeberg.org>
- Create `modules/testimport/import.go` to centralize blank import needed for tests (in order to run the `init` function) to simplify maintenance.
- Remove the imports that are not needed.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10662
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: limiting-factor <limiting-factor@posteo.com>
Co-committed-by: limiting-factor <limiting-factor@posteo.com>
To make sure that the code stays maintainable, I added the `importas` linter to ensure that the imports for models and services stay consistent.
I realised that this might be needed after finding some discrepancies between singular/plural naming, and, especially in the case of the `forgejo.org/services/context` package, multiple different aliases like `gitea_ctx`, `app_context` and `forgejo_context`. I decided for `app_context`, as that seems to be the most commonly used naming.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10253
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: nachtjasmin <nachtjasmin@posteo.de>
Co-committed-by: nachtjasmin <nachtjasmin@posteo.de>
Changes email's `From` field to respect the server's `DEFAULT_SHOW_FULL_NAME` setting, bringing consistency between seeing an email from a user, opening the related issue, and seeing a different name in Forgejo's web UI.
Manually tested by varying the `DEFAULT_SHOW_FULL_NAME` server property, enabling and disabling it:
Fixes#9149.
## 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.
- [ ] 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)).
- Performed manual testing with
### Documentation
- [ ] 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.
### 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/9307
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Print out a list of all unused msgids
Handle Go files that make calls to translation.
Handle `models/unit/unit.go`, which stores msgids in `$Unit.NameKey`
Handle .locale.Tr in templates
Handle simple dynamically constructed `Tr("msgid-prefix." + SomeFunctionCall())`.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8736
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Ellen Εμιλία Άννα Zscheile <fogti+devel@ytrizja.de>
Co-committed-by: Ellen Εμιλία Άννα Zscheile <fogti+devel@ytrizja.de>
When a mail notification is sent because of a failed pull request run,
the body will show:
Branch: #661 (f57df45)
where #661 is the number of the pull request and not the branch. This
is because run.PrettyRef() is used and has a misleading special case
returning a PR number instead of a ref.
Remove the textual description as it can easily be discovered from the
run web page linked in the mail.
## 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.
- [ ] 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.
- [ ] 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.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8448
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>
From the point of view of a notification, the only status which must be considered a fail is `StatusFailure`. All others are either success `StatusSuccess` or undetermined `StatusCancelled` and `StatusSkipped`.
Those are the only four status in which a run can be when it reaches the `ActionRunNowDone` function because it is filtered on `IsDone` which is only true for those.
## 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.
### 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.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8366
Reviewed-by: Antonin Delpeuch <wetneb@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Co-committed-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
* Add the `notify-email` column / NotifyEmail to ActionRun and set it:
* services/actions/workflows.go `Dispatch`
* services/actions/schedule_tasks.go `CreateScheduleTask`
* services/actions/notifier_helper.go `handleWorkflows`
* Only send an email if the workflow has `enable-email-notifications: true` by having `MailActionRun` return immediately if `NotifyEmail` is false.
* Ignore or silently fail on `enable-email-notifications: true` parsing errors. Reporting such errors belongs in workflow validation, not when it is evaluated for the notifications.
* Add unit and integration tests.
Refs: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/8187
## 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.
### 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.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8242
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>
- If the run was attributed to a system user (which is the case for scheduled runs for instance), ignore it and fallback to the mail of the owner. System users may have email addresses, but they are not to be used.
- If the owner is a system user or an organization with no email associated with it, do nothing.
- If a user with an email exists, check if they did not disable notifications and send the email.
Refs: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/8187
Refs: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/8233
## 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.
### 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.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8227
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>
- Use mock helper functions, instead of home-brew solutions.
- Disable cron jobs that are not important to be run during integration tests and might even interfere.
- Avoid sleeping unnecessary, if there's some requirement then sleep or retry until that requirement is met.
- Avoid trying to deliver webhooks that will always result in a failure.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7917
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
- Currently the options `pubkey` and `twofa` only consider TOTP and GPG keys respectively. Adjust the code to also consider WebAuthn credentials and SSH keys.
- While adding the new unified functions I noticed that certain places also benefited from using these unified functions and took the liberty (where it was either a trivial translation or it was covered under testing) to use the new unified functions.
- Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#7658
- Adds unit and integration tests.
Documentation PR: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs/pulls/1166
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7693
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Send a Mail when an action run fails or a workflow recovers.
This PR depends on https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7491closes#3719
## 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.
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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.
<!--start release-notes-assistant-->
## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Features
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7509): <!--number 7509 --><!--line 0 --><!--description c2VuZCBtYWlsIG9uIGZhaWxlZCBvciByZWNvdmVyZWQgd29ya2Zsb3cgcnVu-->send mail on failed or recovered workflow run<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7509
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: christopher-besch <mail@chris-besch.com>
Co-committed-by: christopher-besch <mail@chris-besch.com>
- Some email clients send inline attachments using the `multipart/related` Mime-Type and enmime collects these in the `Envelope.OtherParts` list; until now only Envelope.Attachments and Envelope.Inline were considered while parsing incoming mail.
- As some email clients send attachments without filename, especially in the multipart/related case, this PR implements `constructFilename`, which guesses the filename based on the ContentType.
How the issue was disovered:
I implemented an otherwise unrelated application written in go that parses emails with enmime just like Forgejo does.
I noticed that in a few occasions that system would fail to detect all attachments.
Investigating this issue led me to realize the above described issue.
After implementing a fix for that application, I looked through the Forgejo email parsing code and discovered the same problem.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7136
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: christopher-besch <mail@chris-besch.com>
Co-committed-by: christopher-besch <mail@chris-besch.com>
Some email clients like to be special and only set the "Precedence" header to "auto_reply" when sending automatic replies.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7137
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: christopher-besch <mail@chris-besch.com>
Co-committed-by: christopher-besch <mail@chris-besch.com>
- If the incoming mail feature is enabled, tokens are being sent with
outgoing mails. These tokens contains information about what type of
action is allow with such token (such as replying to a certain issue
ID), to verify these tokens the code uses the HMAC-SHA256 construction.
- The output of the HMAC is truncated to 80 bits, because this is
recommended by RFC2104, but RFC2104 actually doesn't recommend this. It
recommends, if truncation should need to take place, it should use
max(80, hash_len/2) of the leftmost bits. For HMAC-SHA256 this works out
to 128 bits instead of the currently used 80 bits.
- Update to token version 2 and disallow any usage of token version 1,
token version 2 are generated with 128 bits of HMAC output.
- Add test to verify the deprecation of token version 1 and a general
MAC check test.
- Add a `purpose` column, this allows the `forgejo_auth_token` table to
be used by other parts of Forgejo, while still enjoying the
no-compromise architecture.
- Remove the 'roll your own crypto' time limited code functions and
migrate them to the `forgejo_auth_token` table. This migration ensures
generated codes can only be used for their purpose and ensure they are
invalidated after their usage by deleting it from the database, this
also should help making auditing of the security code easier, as we're
no longer trying to stuff a lot of data into a HMAC construction.
-Helper functions are rewritten to ensure a safe-by-design approach to
these tokens.
- Add the `forgejo_auth_token` to dbconsistency doctor and add it to the
`deleteUser` function.
- TODO: Add cron job to delete expired authorization tokens.
- Unit and integration tests added.
Currently notification emails for Pull Requests or Issues are
indistinguishable at first glance. This adds the type ("PR" or "Issue")
before the index number.
- In the spirit of #4635
- Notify the owner when their account is getting enrolled into TOTP. The
message is changed according if they have security keys or not.
- Integration test added.
- Regression of #4635
- The authentication mails weren't being sent with links to the
instance, because the the wrong variable was used in the mail footer.
`$.AppUrl` should've been `AppUrl`.
- Unit test added.
- Currently if the password, primary mail, TOTP or security keys are
changed, no notification is made of that and makes compromising an
account a bit easier as it's essentially undetectable until the original
person tries to log in. Although other changes should be made as
well (re-authing before allowing a password change), this should go a
long way of improving the account security in Forgejo.
- Adds a mail notification for password and primary mail changes. For
the primary mail change, a mail notification is sent to the old primary
mail.
- Add a mail notification when TOTP or a security keys is removed, if no
other 2FA method is configured the mail will also contain that 2FA is
no longer needed to log into their account.
- `MakeEmailAddressPrimary` is refactored to the user service package,
as it now involves calling the mailer service.
- Unit tests added.
- Integration tests added.
Make it posible to let mails show e.g.:
`Max Musternam (via gitea.kithara.com) <gitea@kithara.com>`
Docs: https://gitea.com/gitea/docs/pulls/23
---
*Sponsored by Kithara Software GmbH*
(cherry picked from commit 0f533241829d0d48aa16a91e7dc0614fe50bc317)
Conflicts:
- services/mailer/mail_release.go
services/mailer/mail_test.go
In both cases, applied the changes manually.
Before we had just the plain mail address as recipient. But now we provide additional Information for the Mail clients.
---
Porting information:
- Two behavior changes are noted with this patch, the display name is now always quoted although in some scenarios unnecessary it's a safety precaution of Go. B encoding is used when certain characters are present as they aren't 'legal' to be used as a display name and Q encoding would still show them and B encoding needs to be used, this is now done by Go's `address.String()`.
- Update and add new unit tests.
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/4516
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
I changed the title of the registation email from "Welcome to Gitea" to
"Welcome to (appname)". I did this by substituting 'Gitea' in
register_notify to %s and formating the registration title in mail.go. I
changed this for all the languages I could, but I struggled to changed
the translation file for Farsi. I have attached the screenshots of
before and after and the related issue below.
Related issue:
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/31108
Before change:
After:
---------
Signed-off-by: Sunny Wan <Sunnywan2020@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
(cherry picked from commit 4913edaa70a48f7c5a524f680ca921ed515d6ec2)
Conflicts:
- options/locale/locale_en-US.ini
Applied the change manually. Confliced because we don't have `register_notify.title`.
- services/mailer/mail.go
Adapted the change to Forgejo. We don't have `u.EmailTo` due to
not picking gitea#31527 (yet).
Enable [unparam](https://github.com/mvdan/unparam) linter.
Often I could not tell the intention why param is unused, so I put
`//nolint` for those cases like webhook request creation functions never
using `ctx`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
(cherry picked from commit fc2d75f86d77b022ece848acf2581c14ef21d43b)
Conflicts:
modules/setting/config_env.go
modules/storage/azureblob.go
services/webhook/dingtalk.go
services/webhook/discord.go
services/webhook/feishu.go
services/webhook/matrix.go
services/webhook/msteams.go
services/webhook/packagist.go
services/webhook/slack.go
services/webhook/telegram.go
services/webhook/wechatwork.go
run make lint-go and fix Forgejo specific warnings
Use MockVariableValue to avoid undesirable side effects between tests
modifying global variables. TestToMessage relies
on *setting.MailService being set, which will not be the case if run
individually with test-sqlite#TestToMessage and fail.
Add option to override headers of mails, gitea send out
---
*Sponsored by Kithara Software GmbH*
(cherry picked from commit aace3bccc3290446637cac30b121b94b5d03075f)
Conflicts:
docs/content/administration/config-cheat-sheet.en-us.md
does not exist in Forgejo
services/mailer/mailer_test.go
trivial context conflict
