Likely still a few useless classes left, but I think I at least don't
have missed any.
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
---
Conflict resolution: Trivial
Ref: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2776
(cherry picked from commit f22fe4e1944d8084dec7c04f064a8e782fca94d4)
Fixes: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/29981. Introduce
`.secondary-nav` as a universal way for styling and margin adjustments
inside `.page-content`.
If the first child of `.page-content` is `.secondary-nav`, we add margin
below it, otherwise we add padding to the first child. Notable changes:
- `--color-header-wrapper` is replaced with `--color-secondary-nav-bg`.
- `navbar` class is removed.
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
---
Conflict resolution: Trivial conflict & changed selector to reflect new
classes.
Ref: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2776
(cherry picked from commit 3ccda41a539b8ba7841919ee12dc2877ddc03818)
Existing Forgejo packages may rely on setting GITEA_VERSION to specify
the version to build if:
* they do not build from the git repository with the proper tag
* they build from a source tarbal that does not have a VERSION file
With 7.0 the logic of setting the version was modified in the
`[RELEASE] Gitea version is for interoperability only` commit and
ignores this variable which creates an unecessary breaking change.
If GITEA_VERSION is set, the versions will be set on 7.0 exactly as
they would have with version before and included 1.21.
* If GITEA_VERSION is not set, all versions are the same
* If GITEA_VERSION is set, there is a distinction between the version
set in the binary are returned by the Gitea API and the
version returned by the Forgejo API which includes metadata.
Before:
$ make GITEA_VERSION=7.0.0 show-version-full
7.0.0-dev-1809-cd6fa771ab+gitea-1.22.0
$ make GITEA_VERSION=7.0.0 show-version-api
7.0.0-dev-1809-cd6fa771ab+gitea-1.22.0
After:
$ make GITEA_VERSION=7.0.0 show-version-full
7.0.0
$ make GITEA_VERSION=7.0.0 show-version-api
7.0.0+gitea-1.22.0
There is a small layout shift in when active tab changes. Notice how the
actions SVG is unstable:
This is because the active item with bold text is wider then the
inactive one. I have applied [this
trick](https://stackoverflow.com/a/32570813/808699) to prevent this
layout shift. It's only active inside `<overflow-menu>` because I wanted
to avoid changing HTML and doing it in regular JS would cause a flicker.
I don't expect us to introduce other similar menus without
`<overflow-menu>`, so that place is likely fine.
I also changed the weight from 500 to 600, slightly reduced horizontal
padding, merged some tab-bar related CSS rules and a added a small
margin below repo-header so it does not look so crammed against the
buttons on top.
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
---
Conflict resolution: Moved an `:focus` selector to the new CSS rule.
Ref: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2776
(cherry picked from commit 99d7ef50917e8d61798715e1b0b3dc1a99709f27)
Fixes https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/28297
This PR also fixed a problem that it needs a database transaction when
removing the WIP title.
---
Resolves #2771
Also partially ports gitea#29783
(cherry picked from commit 17d7ab5ad4ce3d0fbc1251572c22687c237a30b1)
There is no code change. Just move notification list related
structs/functions from one file to another.
---
Resolves #2772
Simply move the moderation code to the new function (which wasn't
changed).
(cherry picked from commit b25eec41eb4d7058be808daefd6fd47eed61c7d3)
The fix against the race incorrectly assumes the sha of the commit being
pushed belongs to the base repository. It finds the highest possible
pull request ID from the head repository instead of looking it up in
the base repository.
Figuring out if a PR was created in the future based on the highest
index of the base repository would require collecting all of them
because there is no way to know in advance which repository may be
involved in the race.
Fixing this race can be done either by:
* Introducing a new field in the pull_request table https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/2842
which feels more like a hack than a real solution
* Refactoring the logic
which would be a significant undertaking
The race has been in the codebase for a very long time and manifests
itself in the CI, when events happen in quick succession. The only
concrete manifestation was however fixed by https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2009
Since this race now only exists in theory and not in practice, let's
revert this bugous commit until a proper solution is implemented.
Fixes: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/2817
This reverts commit 036f1eddc5.
Conflicts:
services/pull/pull.go
- Currently it's possible to modify remote references such as
`refs/pull/<idx>/head` and `refs/heads/<branch>`.
- Disallow that the pull request reference is deleted, as this should
not be at the control of the user. Doing so would result in
inconsistencies within Forgejo and lead to internal server errors when
trying access the pull request, this action should be reserved for
Forgejo.
- Do this by utilizing the `update` hook, which process each reference
individually and therefore allow to only skip deleting internal
references and still allow other modifications that is being done in
the same push.
- Ref: https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/1517
