It's time (maybe somewhat late) to remove some deprecated stuff for the
runner.
- `x-runner-version`: runners needn't to report version in every
request, they will call `Declare`.
- `AgentLabels`: runners will report them as `Labels`.
(cherry picked from commit b9396a9b852e4fea0e2c39ef3ef2fdfbc9ea248a)
Conflicts:
routers/api/actions/runner/interceptor.go
trivial conflict because
e80466f734 Resolve lint for unused parameter and unnecessary type arguments (#30750)
was not cherry-picked
More about codespell: https://github.com/codespell-project/codespell .
I personally introduced it to dozens if not hundreds of projects already and so far only positive feedback.
```
❯ grep lint-spell Makefile
@echo " - lint-spell lint spelling"
@echo " - lint-spell-fix lint spelling and fix issues"
lint: lint-frontend lint-backend lint-spell
lint-fix: lint-frontend-fix lint-backend-fix lint-spell-fix
.PHONY: lint-spell
lint-spell: lint-codespell
.PHONY: lint-spell-fix
lint-spell-fix: lint-codespell-fix
❯ git grep lint- -- .forgejo/
.forgejo/workflows/testing.yml: - run: make --always-make -j$(nproc) lint-backend checks-backend # ensure the "go-licenses" make target runs
.forgejo/workflows/testing.yml: - run: make lint-frontend
```
so how would you like me to invoke `lint-codespell` on CI? (without that would be IMHO very suboptimal and let typos sneak in)
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/3270
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Yaroslav Halchenko <debian@onerussian.com>
Co-committed-by: Yaroslav Halchenko <debian@onerussian.com>
Fix #30378
(cherry picked from commit 0fe9f93eb4c94d55e43b18b9c3cc6d513a34c0b5)
Conflicts:
- models/organization/org.go
- services/repository/delete.go
- services/user/delete.go
In all three cases, conflicts were resolved by manually adding
the lines added by the Gitea patch, keeping the Forgejo code
surrounding them.
- Update github.com/bufbuild/connect-go to
https://github.com/connectrpc/connect-go.
- This is a fork that's actively maintained and is recommend by the
original library. Looking at the recent release notes, it looks like
going in the right direction what one would expect of a library, no
strange features being added, lots of improvements.
- There's still an indirect dependency by
`code.gitea.io/actions-proto-go` on a old version of `connect-go`.
This change allows act_runner / actions_runner to use jwt tokens for
`ACTIONS_RUNTIME_TOKEN` that are compatible with
actions/upload-artifact@v4.
The official Artifact actions are now validating and extracting the jwt
claim scp to get the runid and jobid, the old artifact backend also
needs to accept the same token jwt.
---
Related to #28853
I'm not familar with the auth system, maybe you know how to improve this
I have tested
- the jwt token is a valid token for artifact uploading
- the jwt token can be parsed by actions/upload-artifact@v4 and passes
their scp claim validation
Next steps would be a new artifacts@v4 backend.
~~I'm linking the act_runner change soonish.~~
act_runner change to make the change effective and use jwt tokens
<https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/471>
Partially Fix #25041
This PR redefined the meaning of column `is_active` in table
`action_runner_token`.
Before this PR, `is_active` means whether it has been used by any
runner. If it's true, other runner cannot use it to register again.
In this PR, `is_active` means whether it's validated to be used to
register runner. And if it's true, then it can be used to register
runners until it become false. When creating a new `is_active` register
token, any previous tokens will be set `is_active` to false.
Close #24544
Changes:
- Create `action_tasks_version` table to store the latest version of
each scope (global, org and repo).
- When a job with the status of `waiting` is created, the tasks version
of the scopes it belongs to will increase.
- When the status of a job already in the database is updated to
`waiting`, the tasks version of the scopes it belongs to will increase.
- On Gitea side, in `FeatchTask()`, will try to query the
`action_tasks_version` record of the scope of the runner that call
`FetchTask()`. If the record does not exist, will insert a row. Then,
Gitea will compare the version passed from runner to Gitea with the
version in database, if inconsistent, try pick task. Gitea always
returns the latest version from database to the runner.
Related:
- Protocol: https://gitea.com/gitea/actions-proto-def/pulls/10
- Runner: https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/219
Follow #25229
At present, when the trigger event is `pull_request_target`, the `ref`
and `sha` of `ActionRun` are set according to the base branch of the
pull request. This makes it impossible for us to find the head branch of
the `ActionRun` directly. In this PR, the `ref` and `sha` will always be
set to the head branch and they will be changed to the base branch when
generating the task context.
Resolve #24789
## ⚠️ BREAKING ⚠️
Before this, `DEFAULT_ACTIONS_URL` cound be set to any custom URLs like
`https://gitea.com` or `http://your-git-server,https://gitea.com`, and
the default value was `https://gitea.com`.
But now, `DEFAULT_ACTIONS_URL` supports only
`github`(`https://github.com`) or `self`(the root url of current Gitea
instance), and the default value is `github`.
If it has configured with a URL, an error log will be displayed and it
will fallback to `github`.
Actually, what we really want to do is always make it
`https://github.com`, however, this may not be acceptable for some
instances of internal use, so there's extra support for `self`, but no
more, even `https://gitea.com`.
Please note that `uses: https://xxx/yyy/zzz` always works and it does
exactly what it is supposed to do.
Although it's breaking, I belive it should be backported to `v1.20` due
to some security issues.
Follow-up on the runner side:
- https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/262
- https://gitea.com/gitea/act/pulls/70
Fix #25088
This PR adds the support for
[`pull_request_target`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_target)
workflow trigger. `pull_request_target` is similar to `pull_request`,
but the workflow triggered by the `pull_request_target` event runs in
the context of the base branch of the pull request rather than the head
branch. Since the workflow from the base is considered trusted, it can
access the secrets and doesn't need approvals to run.
close #24540
related:
- Protocol: https://gitea.com/gitea/actions-proto-def/pulls/9
- Runner side: https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/201
changes:
- Add column of `labels` to table `action_runner`, and combine the value
of `agent_labels` and `custom_labels` column to `labels` column.
- Store `labels` when registering `act_runner`.
- Update `labels` when `act_runner` starting and calling `Declare`.
- Users cannot modify the `custom labels` in edit page any more.
other changes:
- Store `version` when registering `act_runner`.
- If runner is latest version, parse version from `Declare`. But older
version runner still parse version from request header.
This PR replaces all string refName as a type `git.RefName` to make the
code more maintainable.
Fix #15367
Replaces #23070
It also fixed a bug that tags are not sync because `git remote --prune
origin` will not remove local tags if remote removed.
We in fact should use `git fetch --prune --tags origin` but not `git
remote update origin` to do the sync.
Some answer from ChatGPT as ref.
> If the git fetch --prune --tags command is not working as expected,
there could be a few reasons why. Here are a few things to check:
>
>Make sure that you have the latest version of Git installed on your
system. You can check the version by running git --version in your
terminal. If you have an outdated version, try updating Git and see if
that resolves the issue.
>
>Check that your Git repository is properly configured to track the
remote repository's tags. You can check this by running git config
--get-all remote.origin.fetch and verifying that it includes
+refs/tags/*:refs/tags/*. If it does not, you can add it by running git
config --add remote.origin.fetch "+refs/tags/*:refs/tags/*".
>
>Verify that the tags you are trying to prune actually exist on the
remote repository. You can do this by running git ls-remote --tags
origin to list all the tags on the remote repository.
>
>Check if any local tags have been created that match the names of tags
on the remote repository. If so, these local tags may be preventing the
git fetch --prune --tags command from working properly. You can delete
local tags using the git tag -d command.
---------
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
When creating commit status for Actons jobs, a payload with nil
`HeadCommit` will cause panic.
Reported at:
https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/issues/28#issuecomment-732166
Although the `HeadCommit` probably can not be nil after #23215,
`CreateCommitStatus` should protect itself, to avoid being broken in the
future.
In addition, it's enough to print error log instead of returning err
when `CreateCommitStatus` failed.
---------
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
The name of the job or step comes from the workflow file, while the name
of the runner comes from its registration. If the strings used for these
names are too long, they could cause db issues.
