Commit graph

1,681 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Mathieu Fenniak
cdd35458a9 feat: enable auth to git LFS via authorized integrations (#12725)
The goal is to enable access to Git LFS resources with Authorized Integrations JWTs.

Blocker that needed to be resolved is that adding the `AuthorizedIntegration` auth method would conflict with the LFS tokens, which are handed out during git ssh clones to allow access to LFS resources -- `AuthorizedIntegration` would mark these as `AuthenticationAttemptedIncorrectCredential`, and therefore the requests would 401 before they got to the LFS-specific token validation routines.  The fix is to move LFS token authentication into an authentication group so that it could be resolved at the same time as the authorized integration, rather than doing it inside the LFS server routines.

Refactors for LFS tokens are covered by refreshed test automation.  Authorized integrations LFS Access has been manually tested, and will be further covered in an end-to-end integration test (https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/end-to-end/pulls/1954).

## 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.
  - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I ran...
  - [ ] `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

- [ ] 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/12725
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-28 23:20:58 +02:00
numen
427457946b feat(api): return created time in /org/{org} endpoint (#12633)
closes #4126

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12633
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-28 21:25:41 +02:00
Shiny Nematoda
6f5df4fae6 fix(ui): fix typo in issue sort dropdown; relevance was misnamed as relevency (#12771)
closes #12769

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12771
Reviewed-by: Robert Wolff <mahlzahn@posteo.de>
2026-05-28 20:48:25 +02:00
Gusted
6c85dffb78 fix: load repo language for converting to api struct (#12737)
Load the primary language of the repository when it's converted to a API struct. This is simpler than adding `LoadAttributes` to a lot of places.

Resolves forgejo/forgejo#12729

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12737
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-28 17:00:40 +02:00
Andreas Ahlenstorf
fa5a2501d0 fix: do not hide previous attempts without task for latest attempt (#12779)
If a Forgejo Actions job was run more than once, Forgejo would not display previous attempts if no `ActionTask` existed for the latest attempt. That is the case when a job is cancelled or skipped before having been dispatched to a runner or while it is waiting for a runner. This is fixed by always loading all existing attempts.

Resolves #12626.

## 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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12779
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-28 15:16:48 +02:00
oliverpool
68858a9de2 fix: enable "Add more..." unit hint for new users (#12565)
For new users, the `EnableRepoUnitHints` is set to false while I think that the original intent of #2221 was to set it to true (the migration set it to true for already existing users in `AddUserRepoUnitHintsSetting`).

This PR sets its to true upon user creation.

![screenshot showing the `Add more...` hint - from the original PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/attachments/dc654ddd-e7cb-4667-b0d3-3fac39776be3)

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12565
Reviewed-by: limiting-factor <limiting-factor@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-27 20:44:44 +02:00
oliverpool
fd283c80b7 feat: add hint to disable the "Enable more" units hint (#12747)
Following the feedback in #12565, this adds a hint to the units page when the "Enable more" hint is enabled:

![image](/attachments/32dac116-9f25-498d-9ef0-8b18b06cfc53)

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12747
Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Robert Wolff <mahlzahn@posteo.de>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-27 20:43:47 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
b18d28b3b5 fix: debian package cleanup failure due to xorm connection corruption (#12764)
Fixes #12645.  Detailed analysis in [this comment](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/12645#issuecomment-15939122).  New test case is verified to hit the bug -- the previous case just narrowly missed the problem because it ended up with an empty repository index.

## 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/12764
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-27 17:47:11 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
dfdd9b2e2a fix: check quota in LFS uploads against the repository owner, not operating user (#12755)
Follow-up to the previously closed #12437; verifies git LFS quotas are checked against the repository owner not the current actor.

## 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.

<!--start release-notes-assistant-->

## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Bug fixes
  - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12755): <!--number 12755 --><!--line 0 --><!--description Y2hlY2sgcXVvdGEgaW4gTEZTIHVwbG9hZHMgYWdhaW5zdCB0aGUgcmVwb3NpdG9yeSBvd25lciwgbm90IG9wZXJhdGluZyB1c2Vy-->check quota in LFS uploads against the repository owner, not operating user<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12755
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-27 04:31:09 +02:00
Catherine
0c418d2c0e feat: add /api/v1/actions/run endpoint (#12727)
This endpoint returns the Actions run metadata for the automatic token, making it possible for external services to authenticate a specific workflow run and understand its security context (e.g. whether it is a pull request run and if yes what pull request it is).

The concrete motivating case for this feature is safe pull request preview rendering. Currently, even Forgejo itself ([forgejo/docs](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs/src/branch/next/.forgejo/workflows/pr.yml), [forgejo/website](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/website/src/branch/main/.forgejo/workflows/pr.yml)) uses carefully managed `pull_request_target` workflows for this task. The `pull_request_target` workflow type coupled with intentionally cloning the merge head is widely recognized as insecure, including by Forgejo developers. However, right now there is no particularly good replacement for this approach: Forgejo doesn't expose enough metadata to grant an Actions run permissions to update a part of a website, and only that part (by whichever mechanism this would happen).

I am one of the developers of [git-pages](https://codeberg.org/git-pages/git-pages), which is used as the new Codeberg Pages backend. I would like to implement native support for pull request previews that does not rely on carefully written but still fragile workflows that try to hide authorization tokens from untrusted code, but rather recognizes "pull request Actions run" as a unique kind of security context, and allow it to publish to a special "preview zone", segregated by the repository name and PR number. To do this I need to be able to authorize a specific workflow run. Right now there's no reasonable way to do this, but with the new endpoint it becomes trivial: actions/git-pages passes the automatic token to git-pages, git-pages asks Forgejo for metadata then forms an authorized site URL (e.g. `http://<reponame>-<username>-pr-<number>.preview.codeberg.page` though this is not the final format) to which this PR workflow may upload a site.

The API endpoint implemented in this PR has been discussed in the Matrix room and I understood that this change would be uncontroversial, hence I'm sending this PR right away instead of opening a feature request first. It doesn't introduce new response types, only returns an `ActionRun` for the authorization token. The namespaced URL `/api/v1/actions/run` was chosen because there are a number of things one could conceivably want to retrieve (e.g. `/api/v1/actions/job`); this specific endpoint seems by far the most useful though.

## 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 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.
  The new API endpint is surfaced in Swagger, which seems sufficient.

### 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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12727
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: crystal <crystal@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-26 16:03:21 +02:00
Andreas Ahlenstorf
761ed894c5 fix: workflow with pull_request trigger and path filter not run when merging (#12739)
Forgejo would not trigger Actions workflows `on: pull_request:` with `paths:` or `paths-ignore:` filters when the pull request was merged. The reason was that the triggers were evaluated after the PR was merged, but Forgejo still looked for changed files between the base branch and the PR's HEAD, which by then was already in the base branch.

Resolves https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/12585.

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript 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

### Tests for JavaScript changes

(can be removed for Go changes)

- 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

- [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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12739
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-26 03:45:09 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
c8d24ff06a feat: enable auth to git HTTP via authorized integrations (#12715)
Allow authentication to git HTTP & git LFS via an authorized integration.

This is the first step in getting rid of OAuth, basic auth, etc.'s usage of [`isGitRawOrAttachPath(req)`](26f18a94ee/services/auth/method/basic.go (L38-L40)).  I don't want to follow that pattern of HTTP route matching in the authentication method, so I've broken the HTTP routes related to git functionality out to using a separate authentication middleware in the top-level `web.Routes` handler.  As this approach is expanded to the other endpoints in order to add support to them for authorized integrations, eventually it will be possible to remove this URL matching completely and just rely on middleware installation.

## 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

- [ ] 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/12715
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-25 19:33:36 +02:00
Gusted
385c0db94f feat: fsck incoming objects (#12695)
Weirdly, git doesn't verify the consistency of objects when receiving
new objects. Enable that git verifies this, so we don't allow a
repository to get in a weird or even corrupt state.

We've already dealt with a few cases of inconsistent objects, the most
notable one being mode of objects (forgejo/forgejo!9161). This can be
risky, as such ignore 3 consistency checks that are not harmful to
ignore and is battle tested by Gitlab.

bad timezone:
692a0d3476

missing space:
2da0b39399

non-zero padded filemode:
db8f2e8da5

Typically we set these settings in `modules/git/git.go`, but that means
a instance administrator wouldn't be able to override it. Given we don't
strictly require these settings to be set. A instance admin could
choose to disable the consistency checks or override our set of ignores
this would allow them to do so via the `[git.config]` section.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12695
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: elle <0xllx0@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-25 14:51:04 +02:00
0ko
c400a3fac7 chore(i18n): May 2026 maintenence (#12718)
* remove two unused strings I identified while doing other things
* update two strings per request of @mahlzahn while avoiding a whole separate PR for this
* move 126 strings to JSON, some are remapped with a better structure
    * previous migration: forgejo/forgejo!12280

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12718
Reviewed-by: Robert Wolff <mahlzahn@posteo.de>
2026-05-25 10:59:49 +02:00
numen
3650528262 fix: return API URL in the url field for pull requests using the API (#12643)
closes #10451

### 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...
  - [ ] `make pr-go` before pushing

### 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.

<!--start release-notes-assistant-->

## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Bug fixes
  - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12643): <!--number 12643 --><!--line 0 --><!--description cmV0dXJuIEFQSSBVUkwgaW4gdGhlIGB1cmxgIGZpZWxkIGZvciBwdWxsIHJlcXVlc3RzIHVzaW5nIHRoZSBBUEk=-->return API URL in the `url` field for pull requests using the API<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12643
Reviewed-by: Robert Wolff <mahlzahn@posteo.de>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-25 04:01:17 +02:00
limiting-factor
5c61808014 fix: display the actions trust management panel on merged and closed pull requests (#12704)
It is possible for a user that is not trusted to run Forgejo Actions workflows on a repository to act on a pull request and trigger a workflow after it is merged or closed. For instance by modifying the title of the pull request or setting a label.

Closes forgejo/forgejo#12576

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript 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.

<!--start release-notes-assistant-->

## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- User Interface bug fixes
  - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12704): <!--number 12704 --><!--line 0 --><!--description ZGlzcGxheSB0aGUgYWN0aW9ucyB0cnVzdCBtYW5hZ2VtZW50IHBhbmVsIG9uIG1lcmdlZCBhbmQgY2xvc2VkIHB1bGwgcmVxdWVzdHM=-->display the actions trust management panel on merged and closed pull requests<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12704
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-23 18:21:21 +02:00
limiting-factor
03d336de44 chore: TestAPIInternalAndExternalIssueTracker uses the wrong repository (#12706)
Regression introduced by forgejo/forgejo!11356

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12706
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-23 15:18:38 +02:00
B0sh
e49cb9e772 fix: emoji's should not render in inline code blocks in issue lists (#12644)
This fixes #12548. I used the `RenderRefIssueTitle` function so it wouldn't create issue or PR links from #<number> strings.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12644
Reviewed-by: Robert Wolff <mahlzahn@posteo.de>
2026-05-22 13:20:42 +02:00
Gusted
4131cc4159 ench: use GET for lastcommit route (#12670)
When it was introduced the route did receive for which entries it should get the last commit for. It was refactored in 1e29bccddb to HTMX and now simply gets the last commit for all entries.

In the spirit of using the correct HTTP methods, switch it to GET.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12670
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-22 10:40:28 +02:00
Shiny Nematoda
9ba57d5879 fix(issue-search): drop all labels ids if no label (0) is present (#12665)
Previously, only an exact "0" was considered as no label.
This however, lead to inconsistent results when label ids were added manually to the query string.
Such as, "?labels=100,0" or "?labels=0,100".

closes #12649

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12665
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-21 22:21:05 +02:00
guillermodotn
93638e11cc fix: return 404 instead of 500 for non-existing SHA in commit status endpoint (#12476)
API consumers will see a different HTTP status code (404 instead of 500) for invalid SHAs.

Fixes: #12239

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12476
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-21 21:52:34 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
29eddd311b chore: upgrade to https://code.forgejo.org/xorm/xorm v1.4.0 (#12639)
Upgrade Forgejo to our forked [xorm v1.4.0](https://code.forgejo.org/xorm/xorm/compare/v1.3.9-forgejo.12...v1.4.0), which is now named `code.forgejo.org/xorm/xorm` to reflect the current expectation that it is a permanent fork.  A small number of API changes were made recently in https://code.forgejo.org/xorm/xorm/issues/120 which are accounted for in this PR, in addition to the module rename.

## 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).

### 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/12639
Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org>
2026-05-20 20:20:08 +02:00
steven.guiheux
0ef80f6b0f feat: expose access token creation date in API responses (#12620)
## Checklist

Following the previous contribution that added admin-level management of user access tokens (particularly useful for bot/service accounts), this change exposes the created_at field in the API response when listing or retrieving access tokens.

This information is needed to implement token rotation policies for these users — knowing when a token was created allows administrators to identify and revoke stale tokens.

### 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

### Documentation

- [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.

<!--start release-notes-assistant-->

## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Features
  - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12620): <!--number 12620 --><!--line 0 --><!--description ZXhwb3NlIGFjY2VzcyB0b2tlbiBjcmVhdGlvbiBkYXRlIGluIEFQSSByZXNwb25zZXM=-->expose access token creation date in API responses<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12620
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-20 18:45:38 +02:00
vini sdl
aec047c7b5 fix(ui): fix and simplify org invite template view (#12580)
This fixes #12119 while simplifying the page a bit.

It also drops dependency on `/web_src/css/modules/card.css` module. Only the profile page still relies on it.

As an observation, I find the text "Please click the button below..." quite inadequate as web copy, but I decided to keep it as-is in this pull request.

In the `org.css` changes, I also removed references to two `.organization.invite #invite-box` selectors, since I couldn't find it anywhere in the source code.

Screenshot:
![image](/attachments/07a03b9f-0a69-41ff-b54a-1277783969e3)

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript 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...
  - [ ] `make pr-go` before pushing

### Tests for JavaScript changes

(can be removed for Go changes)

- 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

- [ ] 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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12580
Reviewed-by: Antonin Delpeuch <wetneb@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-19 21:17:08 +02:00
John Berthels
08949c518a fix: expose API fields for ssh keys (#12517) (#12625)
The original issue only mentions 'Verified', but 'Updated' was also
missing and so is also included.

The integration test only covers the initial `false` state. Attempting
to cover the flip to true seemed to introduce more problems than
benefits (as outlined in `tests/integration/api_keys_test.go`)

Manual testing was performed to check that verifying the key in the web
ui caused the return value to change from false to true in the API
response (using `curl`).

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript 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

### Tests for JavaScript changes

(can be removed for Go changes)

- 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

- [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/12625
Reviewed-by: Cyborus <cyborus@disroot.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-18 17:44:37 +02:00
IRONM00N
d130e1ee94 feat: add option to use preferred_username claim when registering users via oauth2 (#12504)
This is a continuation of #3346 based on the advise of https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/1452#issuecomment-14591307.

fixes: #1452
docs: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs/pulls/1938

Extends the `oauth2_client` `USERNAME` setting to be able to use the `preferred_username` claim.

Co-authored-by: thepaperpilot <thepaperpilot@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Anthony Lawn <thepaperpilot@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12504
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-18 00:14:46 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
cf087a2f12 feat: ability to edit authorized integration in web UI (#12601)
Extends the UI introduced in #12558 to have edit capabilities.  (not in scope: "Add" for a new Authorized Integration will be the next update to this UI; `create-authorized-integration` CLI is still the only way to create a new record)

This PR includes a few refactoring steps.  The goal of these steps is to have `services/auth` be a single entrypoint for validating, inserting, or updating an authorized integration.  Some logic is moved out of `services/authz` because it is not authorization related, and some is moved out of `services/auth/method` to allow it to be reused during validation without creating a cyclical module dependency.

This PR also adds comprehensive validation to the more complex fields in the authorized integration, such as the issuer and claim rules.  This validation applies to the `forgejo admin user create-authorized-integration` CLI as well.

The visible UI is the same as #12558, but with a "Save" button, and the ability to display errors:

![Screenshot 2026-05-16 at 15-43-20 Authorized Integrations - Forgejo Beyond coding. We Forge](/attachments/ffaf60e2-3652-429b-a815-b339100f05f8)

## 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.
  - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I ran...
  - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing

### Tests for JavaScript changes

- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
  - [ ] 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)).

### 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.
    - Documentation is on my TODO list and will be completed before release.

### 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/12601
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-17 18:33:39 +02:00
Andreas Ahlenstorf
8a1021e2a0 feat: mark skipped checks as skipped (#12606)
A separate commit status is introduced for skipped checks. That enables marking them as such in the UI instead of successful, which could be misleading.

Resolves https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/10138.

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript 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

### Tests for JavaScript changes

(can be removed for Go changes)

- 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

- [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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12606
Reviewed-by: Cyborus <cyborus@disroot.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-17 18:00:49 +02:00
Shiny Nematoda
4ecb25a549 enh(issue-search): support filtering by project in user/org listing (#12596)
Support filtering `/issue` & `/pulls` (and corresponding org paths) by a project ID.

Closes #12559

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12596
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-17 12:00:25 +02:00
Antonin Delpeuch
0a57672544 feat: serve downsized versions of avatars (#11242)
Fixes #2325.

This introduces a way to download downsized versions of the user and repository avatars:
* `/avatars/123abcd` still serves the full-size avatar
* `/avatars/123abcd?size=64` serves it at size 64x64 px

Those downsized versions are computed on demand when requested for the first time and cached. The caching is done in a storage location configurable in the instance settings, just like the storage locations for the full-sized avatars are. The sizes of the downsized images are restricted to a fixed set of sizes, so that the cache doesn't grow too big. The caching and resizing logic is exposed in a way that could potentially be reused for other types of images (such as user uploads in issue discussions).

Luckily, the Go templates already specify in many places which size those avatars should be rendered, even if this information was only used for external avatar providers (such as Gravatar) until now.

The range of sizes requested by the HTML templates is rather wide: the table below lists all the sizes I could find, and the corresponding size served by the backend with the logic I implemented. The scaling factor of 2 was already used for requesting resized external avatars, and likely exists to make sure that users with display scaling enabled get a sharper picture.

| Size requested in the template | After scaling (x2)  | Size of the image served |
|---------|---------|---------|
| 256 px |  512 px | original (512 px) |
| 140 px | 280 px | original (512 px) |
| 48 px | 96 px | 128 px |
| 40 px | 80 px | 128 px |
| 32 px | 64 px | 64 px |
| 28 px | 56 px | 64 px |
| 24 px | 48 px | 64 px |
| 20 px | 40 px | 64 px |

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/11242
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-16 12:04:05 +02:00
Robert Wolff
d4d2c64d23 fix(ui): use URL query escaping for SSH key verification reload token link (#12581)
Follow-up of: forgejo/forgejo!9002

Closes: Codeberg/Community#2575

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12581
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-16 11:51:17 +02:00
jvoisin
d0f35bd1ba fix: make the fork API respect CanCreateOrgRepo policy (#12442)
When a forking target organization was supplied, the API handler only verified
org membership. This is asymmetric with the rest of the codebase, as
CanCreateOrgRepo is used everywhere else.

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript 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.
- [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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

Co-authored-by: jvoisin <julien.voisin@dustri.org>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12442
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-15 05:16:07 +02:00
Erwan Leboucher
0211c1eace feat: persist OAuth2/OIDC sign-in via IdP re-validation (#12321)
The session cookie has no Max-Age, so it is lost when the browser closes. The password flow compensates via a "Remember me" checkbox issuing an LTA cookie; OAuth2/OIDC sign-in had no such UI.

Issuing a regular LTA cookie after an OAuth callback would skip the IdP for LOGIN_REMEMBER_DAYS. Instead, this introduces a separate LongTermAuthorizationSSO purpose: the cookie is opt-in via the existing "Remember me" checkbox, and when presented without a session, autoSignIn redirects through the IdP with OIDC prompt=none for silent re-auth. On login_required / interaction_required / consent_required / account_selection_required
we transparently fall back to interactive sign-in.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12321
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-15 02:31:20 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
c1000624c6 feat: view authorized integration (generic) 2026-05-14 23:54:16 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
2a0df7474a chore: fix unclear boolean predicate retval in AssertElementPredicate 2026-05-14 23:54:16 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
ba3619d1df feat(ui): list authorized integrations 2026-05-14 23:54:16 +02:00
Robert Wolff
21716ef31c fix(ui): show "Shell" instead of "Bash" in headers of shell script files (#12562)
This is a quick hack to show "Shell" instead of "Bash" which is an upstream issue that likely won’t be fixed.

This makes it also slightly more consistent with the repository’s language statistics, which show "Shell", too.

Closes: Codeberg/Community#2627
Related: https://github.com/alecthomas/chroma/pull/1174

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12562
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-14 22:33:51 +02:00
Antonin Delpeuch
7eebf5642c fix: paginate list of repositories in a team (#12549)
Follow-up to #12103 / !12447, which added pagination for lists of team members. @mahlzahn has [noticed](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/12103#issuecomment-14454947) that the same problem applies to the list of repositories controlled by a team, so this PR adds pagination for that too.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12549
Reviewed-by: Robert Wolff <mahlzahn@posteo.de>
2026-05-14 22:30:56 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
6e5dbfa169 fix: handle boolean workflow inputs correctly before jobparser evaluates with them (#12539)
Fixes https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/forgejo-actions-feature-requests/issues/112.

Currently boolean `workflow_dispatch` values are being passed as strings during Forgejo's job parsing, causing both true & false to have the same behaviour when evaluated in a condition like this:

```
on:
  workflow_dispatch:
    inputs:
      win32:
        type: boolean

jobs:
  job1:
    strategy:
      matrix:
        runner: ${{ fromJSON(inputs.win32 == 'true' && '["win32", "win64"]' || '["win64"]') }}
    steps: # ...
```

## 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...
  - [ ] `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/12539
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-12 22:41:07 +02:00
oliverpool
88ba174119 tests: better factory with forgery package (#11356)
### Context

Following the feedback in forgejo/discussions#170 (and my ambitious attempt in forgejo/forgejo#10985), it appears that having an easy-to-use factory package would greatly help get rid of the global fixtures.

I think that the global fixtures are quite harmful (recent example: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9906#issuecomment-10826066):
- hard to write (contributor must know where to add them)
- hard to change (may break some unrelated tests)
- hard to review (not located near the test code)
- they require the tests to execute sequentially

### Proposed way forward

The `forgery` package (the name represents faking/crafting and sounds good with Forgejo) is meant to replace global yaml fixtures with local go factories. The forgery can currently:
- create users
- create repos
- create organisations

This allowed me to drop `CreateDeclarativeRepoWithOptions` (and deprecate `CreateDeclarativeRepo`).

I think that further changes should be delayed to other PRs (I have a local branch to create `Project`)

### 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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/11356
Reviewed-by: limiting-factor <limiting-factor@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-12 20:57:02 +02:00
Mathieu Fenniak
32b8d732b8 2026-05-12 security patches (#12493)
- fix: prevent git write to wiki repo from unauthorized user via git HTTP
- fix: prevent LFS authorization token from being used for read/write access after user's access is restricted from Forgejo
- fix: prevent scoped API access (OAuth tokens, Access tokens) from accessing resources beyond their permitted scope via non-API endpoints (e.g. /user/repo/raw/...)
- fix: implementing missing OAuth validation checks, improve protections against race conditions
- fix: prevent OAuth redirect URI spoofing via non-ascii case collision
- fix: strengthen Actions Artifact V4 signature algorithm against spoofing attacks

<!--start release-notes-assistant-->

## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Security bug fixes
  - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12493): <!--number 12493 --><!--line 0 --><!--description MjAyNi0wNS0xMiBzZWN1cml0eSBwYXRjaGVz-->2026-05-12 security patches<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->

Co-authored-by: Derzsi Dániel <daniel@tohka.us>
Co-authored-by: jvoisin <julien.voisin@dustri.org>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12493
2026-05-12 04:54:25 +02:00
steven.guiheux
ba1c3e0288 feat(api): add admin routes to manage user access tokens (#12323)
# Feature Request: Admin API route to manage access tokens for any user
## Problem
The existing API route to create access tokens (POST /api/v1/users/{username}/tokens) requires Basic authentication (username + password) via the reqBasicOrRevProxyAuth() middleware. This is by design: a token should not be created from another token.

However, this creates a blocker for environments where Basic authentication is disabled (ENABLE_BASIC_AUTHENTICATION = false), typically when authentication is delegated to an external SSO provider (e.g., OpenID Connect).

In such setups, bot/service accounts are provisioned by an external system that needs to:

Create a user via POST /api/v1/admin/users (works fine with an admin token)
Create an access token for that user (currently impossible without Basic auth or direct CLI/DB access)
The only workaround today is to SSH into the Forgejo server and run:

This is not suitable when the provisioning system has no direct access to the Forgejo host.

## Proposed solution
Add new admin-only API routes under the existing /api/v1/admin/users/{username} group to manage access tokens:

| Method |	Route |	Description |
|:-------- |:--------:| --------:|
| GET	| /api/v1/admin/users/{username}/tokens |	List access tokens for a user|
|POST	| /api/v1/admin/users/{username}/tokens |	Create an access token for a user|
|DELETE |	/api/v1/admin/users/{username}/tokens/{id} |	Delete an access token for a user|

These routes would:

Require a site admin token (reqToken() + reqSiteAdmin()) — no Basic auth needed
Use the AccessTokenScopeCategoryAdmin token scope
Reuse the existing handler logic from user.CreateAccessToken / user.ListAccessTokens / user.DeleteAccessToken
Accept the same request/response payloads as the existing user-facing routes

### Why this belongs in the admin API
It follows the existing pattern: admins can already create users, repos, orgs, SSH keys, and emails for any user via the admin API
It does not weaken security: only site administrators can call it, and it requires a valid admin-scoped token
It fills a gap: the admin CLI command forgejo admin user generate-access-token already provides this capability, but only locally

<!--start release-notes-assistant-->

## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Features
  - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12323): <!--number 12323 --><!--line 0 --><!--description ZmVhdChhcGkpOiBhZGQgYWRtaW4gcm91dGVzIHRvIG1hbmFnZSB1c2VyIGFjY2VzcyB0b2tlbnM=-->feat(api): add admin routes to manage user access tokens<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12323
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-11 16:55:22 +02:00
Andreas Ahlenstorf
03312e4f46 feat: make it possible to remove workflow runs (#12478)
Add the ability to remove workflow runs, either using the UI or the HTTP API. Workflow runs can only be removed once a workflow run has completed. For security reasons, only a repository administrator or a token with `write:repository` permissions can remove runs.

Resolves https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2184.

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript 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

### Tests for JavaScript changes

(can be removed for Go changes)

- 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

- [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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

<!--start release-notes-assistant-->

## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Features
  - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12478): <!--number 12478 --><!--line 0 --><!--description bWFrZSBpdCBwb3NzaWJsZSB0byByZW1vdmUgd29ya2Zsb3cgcnVucw==-->make it possible to remove workflow runs<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12478
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-11 16:02:36 +02:00
famfo
169ea1d991 fix(activitypub): only return public activities on request (#12382)
The endpoint returning individual activities was missing access control checks, since IDs are sequential, this is not ideal.

Fixes #12333

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12382
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-09 05:02:57 +02:00
limiting-factor
508bb7f2ae fix: in actions_service cancelJobsForRun is bugous use killRun instead (#12366)
The cancelJobsForRun function is redundant with the killRun function and has bugs:

- It does not use a transaction and may fail in a non-recoverable way
- It does not update the commit status of the run
-  It does not set NeedRemoval to false if needed

Remove the cancelJobsForRun function and use killRun instead (fixing forgejo/forgejo#12386). Both calls are covered by existing tests:

- TestCancelPreviousJobs
- TestCancelPreviousWithConcurrencyGroup

A new integration test TestActionsPullRequestTrustPushCancel is added to verify that the NeedApproval field is set to false whenever a run is cancelled (fixing forgejo/forgejo#12350).

Closes forgejo/forgejo#12350
Closes forgejo/forgejo#12386

---

Reverting the change fails the test at

b6178e5634/tests/integration/actions_trust_test.go (L520-L533)

with:

```
TAGS='sqlite sqlite_unlock_notify' make 'test-sqlite#TestActionsPullRequestTrustPushCancel'
...
    actions_trust_test.go:523:
        	Error Trace:	/home/limiting-factor/forgejo/tests/integration/actions_trust_test.go:523
        	            				/home/limiting-factor/forgejo/tests/integration/git_helper_for_declarative_test.go:98
        	            				/home/limiting-factor/forgejo/tests/integration/actions_trust_test.go:476
        	Error:      	Should be false
        	Test:       	TestActionsPullRequestTrustPushCancel
```

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript 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.

<!--start release-notes-assistant-->

## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- User Interface bug fixes
  - [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12366): <!--number 12366 --><!--line 0 --><!--description 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-->When the author of a pull request is [denied the right to run Actions](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/user/actions/security-pull-request/) by clicking on the "Deny" button on the pull request trust management panel, the workflow runs created for all commits pushed to the pull request are cancelled. Before that, runs that were automatically cancelled because a newer commit was pushed to the pull request [were stuck in a state waiting for approval](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/12350).<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12366
Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-09 04:46:56 +02:00
Andreas Ahlenstorf
92863bb103 feat: expose run_id in ...actions/runners/jobs endpoint (#12480)
Include `run_id` in the responses emitted by all `...actions/runners/jobs` endpoints. Helps with correlating pending jobs with other jobs and the runs they belong to.

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript 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

### Tests for JavaScript changes

(can be removed for Go changes)

- 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

- [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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12480
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-09 02:31:03 +02:00
Thanos Apollo
3a35c5353e feat: expose AGit topic branch in API PR head label (#12352)
For Agit-flow pull requests, `head.label` was explicitly set to an empty
string.  The head branch name (which contains the Agit topic,
e.g. `user2/my-topic`) was already populated from `pr.HeadBranch` but then
discarded.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12352
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Cyborus <cyborus@disroot.org>
2026-05-08 04:46:57 +02:00
Antonin Delpeuch
115f8594cf fix: paginate team members list (#12447)
Fixes #12103.

Paginate the list of team members on the page for that team.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12447
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-08 01:52:46 +02:00
famfo
5022be3029 fix(activitypub): cover all routes with signature checks (#12339)
This changes the ReqHTTPSignature middleware to cover the entire activitypub
route group to not miss any new routes again in the future. Further, this adds
a tests iterating through all activitypub routes to test that the signature
verification is actually done.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12339
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: elle <0xllx0@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-08 00:40:01 +02:00
Gabor Pihaj
f55f3481f2 test: fix flaky integration test (#12441)
See #12353 for more details

## 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

(can be removed for JavaScript changes)

- 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 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

- [ ] 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.

*The decision if the pull request will be shown in the release notes is up to the mergers / release team.*

The content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` file will serve as the basis for the release notes. If the file does not exist, the title of the pull request will be used instead.

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12441
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
2026-05-07 22:01:13 +02:00