As more and more options can be set for creating the repository, I don't
think we should put all of them into the creation web page which will
make things look complicated and confusing.
And I think we need some rules about how to decide which should/should
not be put in creating a repository page. One rule I can imagine is if
this option can be changed later and it's not a MUST on the creation,
then it can be removed on the page. So I found trust model is the first
one.
This PR removed the trust model selections on creating a repository web
page and kept others as before.
This is also a preparation for #23894 which will add a choice about SHA1
or SHA256 that cannot be changed once the repository created.
By clicking the currently active "Open" or "Closed" filter button in the
issue list, the user can toggle that filter off in order to see all
issues regardless of state. The URL "state" parameter will be set to
"all" and the "Open"/"Closed" button will not show as active.
Fixes#26548
This PR refactors the rendering of markup links. The old code uses
`strings.Replace` to change some urls while the new code uses more
context to decide which link should be generated.
The added tests should ensure the same output for the old and new
behaviour (besides the bug).
We may need to refactor the rendering a bit more to make it clear how
the different helper methods render the input string. There are lots of
options (resolve links / images / mentions / git hashes / emojis / ...)
but you don't really know what helper uses which options. For example,
we currently support images in the user description which should not be
allowed I think:
<details>
<summary>Profile</summary>
https://try.gitea.io/KN4CK3R
</details>
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Fixes#27114.
* In Gitea 1.12 (#9532), a "dismiss stale approvals" branch protection
setting was introduced, for ignoring stale reviews when verifying the
approval count of a pull request.
* In Gitea 1.14 (#12674), the "dismiss review" feature was added.
* This caused confusion with users (#25858), as "dismiss" now means 2
different things.
* In Gitea 1.20 (#25882), the behavior of the "dismiss stale approvals"
branch protection was modified to actually dismiss the stale review.
For some users this new behavior of dismissing the stale reviews is not
desirable.
So this PR reintroduces the old behavior as a new "ignore stale
approvals" branch protection setting.
---------
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
When JavaScript is not loaded, fall back to displaying reaction tooltips
with the default browser `title` attribute. An element with a present
but empty `data-tooltip-content` will use the `title` attribute for its
tippy.js tooltip content, so when JavaScript is enabled, this functions
the same as the current behavior.
There is an accessibility issue in the interface when attempting to
delete a repository. When I click on "Delete repository," a dialog box
appears, requiring confirmation to proceed with the repository deletion.
However, when I press the "Repo name" label, the wrong input field gains
focus. The focused field is located behind the dialog and is intended
for renaming the repository.
- The RSS Feed icons were placed in a proper button, so that it does
not look "inconsistent". This also makes the problem of the button
being improperly aligned go away.
- The icon that shows on user profiles has not been modified because
of a lack of better implementation ideas.
- Where applicable, the RSS Feed icon was put directly next to the
Follow button (right menu), as both functionalities effectively
share the same purpose.
- Despite the attempt at achieving less inconsistency, a conscious
decision to not add any text to those buttons was made, opting for
tooltips instead. "Make it present, but not too annoying."
- A special exception was made for the Releases pages (which contains
text, not a tooltip), where an RSS feed would be particularly
beneficial to users.
The fact that the RSS functionality is explicitly optional was taken
into account, and these improvements were made with public-facing
instances (where the feature works best) in mind.
Fixes https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/1759
If you are bowing another branch than the default branch and click n the
Code tab, it will take you to the root of the branch. The `BranchName`
variable is also set when viewing a Wiki commit, so we also need to
check if we are on a Wiki.
When an assignee changed event comment is rendered, most of it is
guarded behind the assignee ID not being 0. However, if it is 0, that
results in quite broken rendering for that comment and the next one.
This can happen, for example, when repository data imported from outside
of Gitea is incomplete.
This PR makes sure comments with an assignee ID of 0 are not rendered at
all.
---
Screenshot before:
<img width="272" alt="Bildschirmfoto 2023-11-05 um 20 12 18"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/42910/7d629d76-fee4-4fe5-9e3a-bf524050cead">
The comments in this screenshot are:
1. A regular text comment
2. A user being unassigned
3. A user being assigned
4. The title of the PR being changed
Comments 2 and 3 are rendered without any text, which indents the next
comment and does not leave enough vertical space.
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Remove the "tabindex" from some form buttons on the "diff box" / "issue view content" page, let the browser use the default tab order.
---------
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Currently this feature is only available to admins, but there is no
clear reason why. If a user can actually merge pull requests, then this
seems fine as well.
This is useful in situations where direct pushes to the repository are
commonly done by developers.
---------
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
* Show checkout instructions also when there is no permission to push,
for anyone who wants to locally test the changes.
* First checkout the branch exactly as is, without immediately having to
solve merge conflicts. Leave this to the merge step, since it's often
convenient to test a change without worrying about this.
* Use `git fetch -u`, so an existing local branch is updated when
re-testing the same pull request. But not the more risky `git fetch -f`
in to handle force pushes, as we don't want to accidentally overwrite
important local changes.
* Show different merge command depending on the chosen merge style,
interactively updated.
If you set a checkbox as required in a issue form at the moment, the
checkbox is checked and read only, what does not make much sense. With
this PR, the Checkbox actually needs to be checked. The label supports
now also Markdown. This matches GitHub's behaviour.
And yes, I know the CSS is a ugly workaround. It looks like the given
CSS code is part Fomantic and I don't know how to change that. The
Maintainers are free to change that.
yp05327
Lunny Xiao