Backport of #27915Fixes#27819
We have support for two factor logins with the normal web login and with
basic auth. For basic auth the two factor check was implemented at three
different places and you need to know that this check is necessary. This
PR moves the check into the basic auth itself.
Backport #27615 by @lng2020
close#27601
The Docker registry has an internal version, which leads to 404
Co-authored-by: Nanguan Lin <70063547+lng2020@users.noreply.github.com>
Backport #27446 by @sryze
storageHandler() is written as a middleware but is used as an endpoint
handler, and thus `next` is actually `nil`, which causes a null pointer
dereference when a request URL does not match the pattern (where it
calls `next.ServerHTTP()`).
Example CURL command to trigger the panic:
```
curl -I "http://yourhost/gitea//avatars/a"
```
Fixes#27409
---
Note: the diff looks big but it's actually a small change - all I did
was to remove the outer closure (and one level of indentation) ~and
removed the HTTP method and pattern checks as they seem redundant
because go-chi already does those checks~. You might want to check "Hide
whitespace" when reviewing it.
Alternative solution (a bit simpler): append `, misc.DummyOK` to the
route declarations that utilize `storageHandler()` - this makes it
return an empty response when the URL is invalid. I've tested this one
and it works too. Or maybe it would be better to return a 400 error in
that case (?)
Co-authored-by: Sergey Zolotarev <sryze@outlook.com>
Backport #27127 by @earl-warren
- Use the correct total amount for pagination. Thereby correctly show
the pagination bare when there's more than one page of
followers/followings.
Refs: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/1477
(cherry picked from commit c1a136318b)
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <109468362+earl-warren@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Backport #26813 by @JakobDev
You can currently visit `{repo}/issues/new` and create a blank issue,
even if it's disabled. This PR fixes this,
Fixes https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/1356
Co-authored-by: JakobDev <jakobdev@gmx.de>
Backport #26664 by @CaiCandong
> ### Description
> If a new branch is pushed, and the repository has a rule that would
require signed commits for the new branch, the commit is rejected with a
500 error regardless of whether it's signed.
>
> When pushing a new branch, the "old" commit is the empty ID
(0000000000000000000000000000000000000000). verifyCommits has no
provision for this and passes an invalid commit range to git rev-list.
Prior to 1.19 this wasn't an issue because only pre-existing individual
branches could be protected.
>
> I was able to reproduce with
[try.gitea.io/CraigTest/test](https://try.gitea.io/CraigTest/test),
which is set up with a blanket rule to require commits on all branches.
Fix#25565
Very thanks to @Craig-Holmquist-NTI for reporting the bug and suggesting
an valid solution!
Co-authored-by: CaiCandong <50507092+CaiCandong@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Backport of #25613Fixes#25564Fixes#23191
- Api v2 search endpoint should return only the latest version matching
the query
- Api v3 search endpoint should return `take` packages not package
versions
manual backport of #25988 to v1.20
- Tell the renderer to use the `document` mode, so it's consistent with
other renderers.
- Use the same padding as `.file-view.markup`, so it's consistent with
other containers that contain markup rendering.
- Resolves https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/833
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <109468362+earl-warren@users.noreply.github.com>
Backport #26259
This PR will introduce a transaction on creating pull request so that if
some step failed, it will rollback totally. And there will be no dirty
pull request exist.
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Backport #26392 by @wxiaoguang
Fix#26389
And complete an old TODO: `ctx.Params does un-escaping,..., which is
incorrect.`
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Backport #26179 by @CaiCandong
In the original implementation, we can only get the first 30 records of
the commit status (the default paging size), if the commit status is
more than 30, it will lead to the bug #25990. I made the following two
changes.
- On the page, use the ` db.ListOptions{ListAll: true}` parameter
instead of `db.ListOptions{}`
- The `GetLatestCommitStatus` function makes a determination as to
whether or not a pager is being used.
fixed#25990
Co-authored-by: caicandong <50507092+CaiCandong@users.noreply.github.com>
Backport #26182 by @Zettat123
Fix#25934
Add `ignoreGlobal` parameter to `reqUnitAccess` and only check global
disabled units when `ignoreGlobal` is true. So the org-level projects
and user-level projects won't be affected by global disabled
`repo.projects` unit.
Co-authored-by: Zettat123 <zettat123@gmail.com>
Backport #26075 by @KN4CK3R
Fixes#25953
- Do not load full version information (v3)
- Add pagination support (v2)
Co-authored-by: KN4CK3R <admin@oldschoolhack.me>
Backport #26087 by @KN4CK3R
Fixes#26022
- Fix handling of files with trailing slash
- Fix handling of duplicate package file errors
- Added test for both
Co-authored-by: KN4CK3R <admin@oldschoolhack.me>
Backport #26016 by @wxiaoguang
Close#25906
Succeeded logs:
```
[I] router: completed GET /root/test/issues/posters?&q=%20&_=1689853025011 for [::1]:59271, 200 OK in 127.7ms @ repo/issue.go:3505(repo.IssuePosters)
[I] router: completed GET /root/test/pulls/posters?&q=%20&_=1689853968204 for [::1]:59269, 200 OK in 94.3ms @ repo/issue.go:3509(repo.PullPosters)
```
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Backport #25417 by @wxiaoguang
Update WorkPath/WORK_PATH related documents, remove out-dated
information.
Remove "StaticRootPath" on the admin config display page, because few
end user really need it, it only causes misconfiguration.
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Backport #25806 by @yp05327
sort type `oldest` should be `Asc`.
Added a test for this.
I see we have `SearchOrderBy` in db model, but we are using many
different ways to define the sort type.
~Maybe we can improve this later.~
↑ Improved in this PR
Co-authored-by: yp05327 <576951401@qq.com>
