Template
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo synced 2024-11-30 22:06:11 +01:00
forgejo/routers/private/hook_pre_receive.go

630 lines
20 KiB
Go
Raw Normal View History

// Copyright 2019 The Gitea Authors. All rights reserved.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
package private
import (
"errors"
"fmt"
"net/http"
"os"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/models"
asymkey_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/asymkey"
git_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/git"
issues_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/issues"
perm_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/perm"
access_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/perm/access"
feat(quota): Quota enforcement The previous commit laid out the foundation of the quota engine, this one builds on top of it, and implements the actual enforcement. Enforcement happens at the route decoration level, whenever possible. In case of the API, when over quota, a 413 error is returned, with an appropriate JSON payload. In case of web routes, a 413 HTML page is rendered with similar information. This implementation is for a **soft quota**: quota usage is checked before an operation is to be performed, and the operation is *only* denied if the user is already over quota. This makes it possible to go over quota, but has the significant advantage of being practically implementable within the current Forgejo architecture. The goal of enforcement is to deny actions that can make the user go over quota, and allow the rest. As such, deleting things should - in almost all cases - be possible. A prime exemption is deleting files via the web ui: that creates a new commit, which in turn increases repo size, thus, is denied if the user is over quota. Limitations ----------- Because we generally work at a route decorator level, and rarely look *into* the operation itself, `size:repos:public` and `size:repos:private` are not enforced at this level, the engine enforces against `size:repos:all`. This will be improved in the future. AGit does not play very well with this system, because AGit PRs count toward the repo they're opened against, while in the GitHub-style fork + pull model, it counts against the fork. This too, can be improved in the future. There's very little done on the UI side to guard against going over quota. What this patch implements, is enforcement, not prevention. The UI will still let you *try* operations that *will* result in a denial. Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
2024-07-06 10:30:16 +02:00
quota_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/quota"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/models/unit"
user_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/user"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/git"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/log"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/private"
feat(quota): Quota enforcement The previous commit laid out the foundation of the quota engine, this one builds on top of it, and implements the actual enforcement. Enforcement happens at the route decoration level, whenever possible. In case of the API, when over quota, a 413 error is returned, with an appropriate JSON payload. In case of web routes, a 413 HTML page is rendered with similar information. This implementation is for a **soft quota**: quota usage is checked before an operation is to be performed, and the operation is *only* denied if the user is already over quota. This makes it possible to go over quota, but has the significant advantage of being practically implementable within the current Forgejo architecture. The goal of enforcement is to deny actions that can make the user go over quota, and allow the rest. As such, deleting things should - in almost all cases - be possible. A prime exemption is deleting files via the web ui: that creates a new commit, which in turn increases repo size, thus, is denied if the user is over quota. Limitations ----------- Because we generally work at a route decorator level, and rarely look *into* the operation itself, `size:repos:public` and `size:repos:private` are not enforced at this level, the engine enforces against `size:repos:all`. This will be improved in the future. AGit does not play very well with this system, because AGit PRs count toward the repo they're opened against, while in the GitHub-style fork + pull model, it counts against the fork. This too, can be improved in the future. There's very little done on the UI side to guard against going over quota. What this patch implements, is enforcement, not prevention. The UI will still let you *try* operations that *will* result in a denial. Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
2024-07-06 10:30:16 +02:00
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/setting"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/web"
gitea_context "code.gitea.io/gitea/services/context"
pull_service "code.gitea.io/gitea/services/pull"
)
type preReceiveContext struct {
*gitea_context.PrivateContext
// loadedPusher indicates that where the following information are loaded
loadedPusher bool
user *user_model.User // it's the org user if a DeployKey is used
userPerm access_model.Permission
deployKeyAccessMode perm_model.AccessMode
canCreatePullRequest bool
checkedCanCreatePullRequest bool
canWriteCode bool
checkedCanWriteCode bool
protectedTags []*git_model.ProtectedTag
gotProtectedTags bool
env []string
opts *private.HookOptions
feat(quota): Quota enforcement The previous commit laid out the foundation of the quota engine, this one builds on top of it, and implements the actual enforcement. Enforcement happens at the route decoration level, whenever possible. In case of the API, when over quota, a 413 error is returned, with an appropriate JSON payload. In case of web routes, a 413 HTML page is rendered with similar information. This implementation is for a **soft quota**: quota usage is checked before an operation is to be performed, and the operation is *only* denied if the user is already over quota. This makes it possible to go over quota, but has the significant advantage of being practically implementable within the current Forgejo architecture. The goal of enforcement is to deny actions that can make the user go over quota, and allow the rest. As such, deleting things should - in almost all cases - be possible. A prime exemption is deleting files via the web ui: that creates a new commit, which in turn increases repo size, thus, is denied if the user is over quota. Limitations ----------- Because we generally work at a route decorator level, and rarely look *into* the operation itself, `size:repos:public` and `size:repos:private` are not enforced at this level, the engine enforces against `size:repos:all`. This will be improved in the future. AGit does not play very well with this system, because AGit PRs count toward the repo they're opened against, while in the GitHub-style fork + pull model, it counts against the fork. This too, can be improved in the future. There's very little done on the UI side to guard against going over quota. What this patch implements, is enforcement, not prevention. The UI will still let you *try* operations that *will* result in a denial. Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
2024-07-06 10:30:16 +02:00
isOverQuota bool
branchName string
}
// CanWriteCode returns true if pusher can write code
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) CanWriteCode() bool {
if !ctx.checkedCanWriteCode {
if !ctx.loadPusherAndPermission() {
return false
}
ctx.canWriteCode = issues_model.CanMaintainerWriteToBranch(ctx, ctx.userPerm, ctx.branchName, ctx.user) || ctx.deployKeyAccessMode >= perm_model.AccessModeWrite
ctx.checkedCanWriteCode = true
}
return ctx.canWriteCode
}
// AssertCanWriteCode returns true if pusher can write code
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) AssertCanWriteCode() bool {
if !ctx.CanWriteCode() {
if ctx.Written() {
return false
}
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
UserMsg: "User permission denied for writing.",
})
return false
}
return true
}
// CanCreatePullRequest returns true if pusher can create pull requests
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) CanCreatePullRequest() bool {
if !ctx.checkedCanCreatePullRequest {
if !ctx.loadPusherAndPermission() {
return false
}
ctx.canCreatePullRequest = ctx.userPerm.CanRead(unit.TypePullRequests)
ctx.checkedCanCreatePullRequest = true
}
return ctx.canCreatePullRequest
}
// AssertCreatePullRequest returns true if can create pull requests
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) AssertCreatePullRequest() bool {
if !ctx.CanCreatePullRequest() {
if ctx.Written() {
return false
}
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
UserMsg: "User permission denied for creating pull-request.",
})
return false
}
return true
}
var errPermissionDenied = errors.New("permission denied for changing repo settings")
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) canChangeSettings() error {
if !ctx.loadPusherAndPermission() {
return errPermissionDenied
}
if !ctx.userPerm.IsOwner() && !ctx.userPerm.IsAdmin() {
return errPermissionDenied
}
if ctx.Repo.Repository.IsFork {
return errPermissionDenied
}
return nil
}
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) validatePushOptions() error {
opts := web.GetForm(ctx).(*private.HookOptions)
if opts.GetGitPushOptions().ChangeRepoSettings() {
return ctx.canChangeSettings()
}
return nil
}
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) assertPushOptions() bool {
if err := ctx.validatePushOptions(); err != nil {
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("options validation failed: %v", err),
})
return false
}
return true
}
feat(quota): Quota enforcement The previous commit laid out the foundation of the quota engine, this one builds on top of it, and implements the actual enforcement. Enforcement happens at the route decoration level, whenever possible. In case of the API, when over quota, a 413 error is returned, with an appropriate JSON payload. In case of web routes, a 413 HTML page is rendered with similar information. This implementation is for a **soft quota**: quota usage is checked before an operation is to be performed, and the operation is *only* denied if the user is already over quota. This makes it possible to go over quota, but has the significant advantage of being practically implementable within the current Forgejo architecture. The goal of enforcement is to deny actions that can make the user go over quota, and allow the rest. As such, deleting things should - in almost all cases - be possible. A prime exemption is deleting files via the web ui: that creates a new commit, which in turn increases repo size, thus, is denied if the user is over quota. Limitations ----------- Because we generally work at a route decorator level, and rarely look *into* the operation itself, `size:repos:public` and `size:repos:private` are not enforced at this level, the engine enforces against `size:repos:all`. This will be improved in the future. AGit does not play very well with this system, because AGit PRs count toward the repo they're opened against, while in the GitHub-style fork + pull model, it counts against the fork. This too, can be improved in the future. There's very little done on the UI side to guard against going over quota. What this patch implements, is enforcement, not prevention. The UI will still let you *try* operations that *will* result in a denial. Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
2024-07-06 10:30:16 +02:00
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) checkQuota() error {
if !setting.Quota.Enabled {
ctx.isOverQuota = false
return nil
}
if !ctx.loadPusherAndPermission() {
ctx.isOverQuota = true
return nil
}
ok, err := quota_model.EvaluateForUser(ctx, ctx.PrivateContext.Repo.Repository.OwnerID, quota_model.LimitSubjectSizeReposAll)
if err != nil {
log.Error("quota_model.EvaluateForUser: %v", err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
UserMsg: "Error checking user quota",
})
return err
}
ctx.isOverQuota = !ok
return nil
}
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) quotaExceeded() {
ctx.JSON(http.StatusRequestEntityTooLarge, private.Response{
UserMsg: "Quota exceeded",
})
}
// HookPreReceive checks whether a individual commit is acceptable
func HookPreReceive(ctx *gitea_context.PrivateContext) {
opts := web.GetForm(ctx).(*private.HookOptions)
ourCtx := &preReceiveContext{
PrivateContext: ctx,
env: generateGitEnv(opts), // Generate git environment for checking commits
opts: opts,
}
if !ourCtx.assertPushOptions() {
log.Trace("Git push options validation failed")
return
}
log.Trace("Git push options validation succeeded")
feat(quota): Quota enforcement The previous commit laid out the foundation of the quota engine, this one builds on top of it, and implements the actual enforcement. Enforcement happens at the route decoration level, whenever possible. In case of the API, when over quota, a 413 error is returned, with an appropriate JSON payload. In case of web routes, a 413 HTML page is rendered with similar information. This implementation is for a **soft quota**: quota usage is checked before an operation is to be performed, and the operation is *only* denied if the user is already over quota. This makes it possible to go over quota, but has the significant advantage of being practically implementable within the current Forgejo architecture. The goal of enforcement is to deny actions that can make the user go over quota, and allow the rest. As such, deleting things should - in almost all cases - be possible. A prime exemption is deleting files via the web ui: that creates a new commit, which in turn increases repo size, thus, is denied if the user is over quota. Limitations ----------- Because we generally work at a route decorator level, and rarely look *into* the operation itself, `size:repos:public` and `size:repos:private` are not enforced at this level, the engine enforces against `size:repos:all`. This will be improved in the future. AGit does not play very well with this system, because AGit PRs count toward the repo they're opened against, while in the GitHub-style fork + pull model, it counts against the fork. This too, can be improved in the future. There's very little done on the UI side to guard against going over quota. What this patch implements, is enforcement, not prevention. The UI will still let you *try* operations that *will* result in a denial. Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
2024-07-06 10:30:16 +02:00
if err := ourCtx.checkQuota(); err != nil {
return
}
// Iterate across the provided old commit IDs
for i := range opts.OldCommitIDs {
oldCommitID := opts.OldCommitIDs[i]
newCommitID := opts.NewCommitIDs[i]
refFullName := opts.RefFullNames[i]
switch {
Use the type RefName for all the needed places and fix pull mirror sync bugs (#24634) 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>
2023-05-26 03:04:48 +02:00
case refFullName.IsBranch():
preReceiveBranch(ourCtx, oldCommitID, newCommitID, refFullName)
Use the type RefName for all the needed places and fix pull mirror sync bugs (#24634) 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>
2023-05-26 03:04:48 +02:00
case refFullName.IsTag():
preReceiveTag(ourCtx, oldCommitID, newCommitID, refFullName)
Use the type RefName for all the needed places and fix pull mirror sync bugs (#24634) 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>
2023-05-26 03:04:48 +02:00
case git.SupportProcReceive && refFullName.IsFor():
preReceiveFor(ourCtx, oldCommitID, newCommitID, refFullName)
default:
feat(quota): Quota enforcement The previous commit laid out the foundation of the quota engine, this one builds on top of it, and implements the actual enforcement. Enforcement happens at the route decoration level, whenever possible. In case of the API, when over quota, a 413 error is returned, with an appropriate JSON payload. In case of web routes, a 413 HTML page is rendered with similar information. This implementation is for a **soft quota**: quota usage is checked before an operation is to be performed, and the operation is *only* denied if the user is already over quota. This makes it possible to go over quota, but has the significant advantage of being practically implementable within the current Forgejo architecture. The goal of enforcement is to deny actions that can make the user go over quota, and allow the rest. As such, deleting things should - in almost all cases - be possible. A prime exemption is deleting files via the web ui: that creates a new commit, which in turn increases repo size, thus, is denied if the user is over quota. Limitations ----------- Because we generally work at a route decorator level, and rarely look *into* the operation itself, `size:repos:public` and `size:repos:private` are not enforced at this level, the engine enforces against `size:repos:all`. This will be improved in the future. AGit does not play very well with this system, because AGit PRs count toward the repo they're opened against, while in the GitHub-style fork + pull model, it counts against the fork. This too, can be improved in the future. There's very little done on the UI side to guard against going over quota. What this patch implements, is enforcement, not prevention. The UI will still let you *try* operations that *will* result in a denial. Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
2024-07-06 10:30:16 +02:00
if ourCtx.isOverQuota {
ourCtx.quotaExceeded()
return
}
ourCtx.AssertCanWriteCode()
}
if ctx.Written() {
return
}
}
2021-12-15 07:59:57 +01:00
ctx.PlainText(http.StatusOK, "ok")
}
Use the type RefName for all the needed places and fix pull mirror sync bugs (#24634) 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>
2023-05-26 03:04:48 +02:00
func preReceiveBranch(ctx *preReceiveContext, oldCommitID, newCommitID string, refFullName git.RefName) {
branchName := refFullName.BranchName()
ctx.branchName = branchName
if !ctx.AssertCanWriteCode() {
return
}
repo := ctx.Repo.Repository
gitRepo := ctx.Repo.GitRepo
objectFormat := ctx.Repo.GetObjectFormat()
if branchName == repo.DefaultBranch && newCommitID == objectFormat.EmptyObjectID().String() {
log.Warn("Forbidden: Branch: %s is the default branch in %-v and cannot be deleted", branchName, repo)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("branch %s is the default branch and cannot be deleted", branchName),
})
return
}
protectBranch, err := git_model.GetFirstMatchProtectedBranchRule(ctx, repo.ID, branchName)
if err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to get protected branch: %s in %-v Error: %v", branchName, repo, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: err.Error(),
})
return
}
// Allow pushes to non-protected branches
if protectBranch == nil {
feat(quota): Quota enforcement The previous commit laid out the foundation of the quota engine, this one builds on top of it, and implements the actual enforcement. Enforcement happens at the route decoration level, whenever possible. In case of the API, when over quota, a 413 error is returned, with an appropriate JSON payload. In case of web routes, a 413 HTML page is rendered with similar information. This implementation is for a **soft quota**: quota usage is checked before an operation is to be performed, and the operation is *only* denied if the user is already over quota. This makes it possible to go over quota, but has the significant advantage of being practically implementable within the current Forgejo architecture. The goal of enforcement is to deny actions that can make the user go over quota, and allow the rest. As such, deleting things should - in almost all cases - be possible. A prime exemption is deleting files via the web ui: that creates a new commit, which in turn increases repo size, thus, is denied if the user is over quota. Limitations ----------- Because we generally work at a route decorator level, and rarely look *into* the operation itself, `size:repos:public` and `size:repos:private` are not enforced at this level, the engine enforces against `size:repos:all`. This will be improved in the future. AGit does not play very well with this system, because AGit PRs count toward the repo they're opened against, while in the GitHub-style fork + pull model, it counts against the fork. This too, can be improved in the future. There's very little done on the UI side to guard against going over quota. What this patch implements, is enforcement, not prevention. The UI will still let you *try* operations that *will* result in a denial. Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
2024-07-06 10:30:16 +02:00
// ...unless the user is over quota, and the operation is not a delete
if newCommitID != objectFormat.EmptyObjectID().String() && ctx.isOverQuota {
ctx.quotaExceeded()
}
return
}
protectBranch.Repo = repo
// This ref is a protected branch.
//
// First of all we need to enforce absolutely:
//
// 1. Detect and prevent deletion of the branch
if newCommitID == objectFormat.EmptyObjectID().String() {
log.Warn("Forbidden: Branch: %s in %-v is protected from deletion", branchName, repo)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("branch %s is protected from deletion", branchName),
})
return
}
// 2. Disallow force pushes to protected branches
if oldCommitID != objectFormat.EmptyObjectID().String() {
output, _, err := git.NewCommand(ctx, "rev-list", "--max-count=1").AddDynamicArguments(oldCommitID, "^"+newCommitID).RunStdString(&git.RunOpts{Dir: repo.RepoPath(), Env: ctx.env})
if err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to detect force push between: %s and %s in %-v Error: %v", oldCommitID, newCommitID, repo, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Fail to detect force push: %v", err),
})
return
} else if len(output) > 0 {
log.Warn("Forbidden: Branch: %s in %-v is protected from force push", branchName, repo)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("branch %s is protected from force push", branchName),
})
return
}
}
// 3. Enforce require signed commits
if protectBranch.RequireSignedCommits {
err := verifyCommits(oldCommitID, newCommitID, gitRepo, ctx.env)
if err != nil {
if !isErrUnverifiedCommit(err) {
log.Error("Unable to check commits from %s to %s in %-v: %v", oldCommitID, newCommitID, repo, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to check commits from %s to %s: %v", oldCommitID, newCommitID, err),
})
return
}
unverifiedCommit := err.(*errUnverifiedCommit).sha
log.Warn("Forbidden: Branch: %s in %-v is protected from unverified commit %s", branchName, repo, unverifiedCommit)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("branch %s is protected from unverified commit %s", branchName, unverifiedCommit),
})
return
}
}
// Now there are several tests which can be overridden:
//
// 4. Check protected file patterns - this is overridable from the UI
changedProtectedfiles := false
protectedFilePath := ""
globs := protectBranch.GetProtectedFilePatterns()
if len(globs) > 0 {
_, err := pull_service.CheckFileProtection(gitRepo, oldCommitID, newCommitID, globs, 1, ctx.env)
if err != nil {
if !models.IsErrFilePathProtected(err) {
log.Error("Unable to check file protection for commits from %s to %s in %-v: %v", oldCommitID, newCommitID, repo, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to check file protection for commits from %s to %s: %v", oldCommitID, newCommitID, err),
})
return
}
changedProtectedfiles = true
protectedFilePath = err.(models.ErrFilePathProtected).Path
}
}
// 5. Check if the doer is allowed to push
var canPush bool
if ctx.opts.DeployKeyID != 0 {
canPush = !changedProtectedfiles && protectBranch.CanPush && (!protectBranch.EnableWhitelist || protectBranch.WhitelistDeployKeys)
} else {
user, err := user_model.GetUserByID(ctx, ctx.opts.UserID)
if err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to GetUserByID for commits from %s to %s in %-v: %v", oldCommitID, newCommitID, repo, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to GetUserByID for commits from %s to %s: %v", oldCommitID, newCommitID, err),
})
return
}
canPush = !changedProtectedfiles && protectBranch.CanUserPush(ctx, user)
}
// 6. If we're not allowed to push directly
if !canPush {
// Is this is a merge from the UI/API?
if ctx.opts.PullRequestID == 0 {
// 6a. If we're not merging from the UI/API then there are two ways we got here:
//
// We are changing a protected file and we're not allowed to do that
if changedProtectedfiles {
log.Warn("Forbidden: Branch: %s in %-v is protected from changing file %s", branchName, repo, protectedFilePath)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("branch %s is protected from changing file %s", branchName, protectedFilePath),
})
return
}
// Allow commits that only touch unprotected files
globs := protectBranch.GetUnprotectedFilePatterns()
if len(globs) > 0 {
unprotectedFilesOnly, err := pull_service.CheckUnprotectedFiles(gitRepo, oldCommitID, newCommitID, globs, ctx.env)
if err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to check file protection for commits from %s to %s in %-v: %v", oldCommitID, newCommitID, repo, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to check file protection for commits from %s to %s: %v", oldCommitID, newCommitID, err),
})
return
}
if unprotectedFilesOnly {
// Commit only touches unprotected files, this is allowed
return
}
}
// Or we're simply not able to push to this protected branch
log.Warn("Forbidden: User %d is not allowed to push to protected branch: %s in %-v", ctx.opts.UserID, branchName, repo)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("Not allowed to push to protected branch %s", branchName),
})
return
}
// 6b. Merge (from UI or API)
// Get the PR, user and permissions for the user in the repository
pr, err := issues_model.GetPullRequestByID(ctx, ctx.opts.PullRequestID)
if err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to get PullRequest %d Error: %v", ctx.opts.PullRequestID, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to get PullRequest %d Error: %v", ctx.opts.PullRequestID, err),
})
return
}
// although we should have called `loadPusherAndPermission` before, here we call it explicitly again because we need to access ctx.user below
if !ctx.loadPusherAndPermission() {
// if error occurs, loadPusherAndPermission had written the error response
return
}
// Now check if the user is allowed to merge PRs for this repository
// Note: we can use ctx.perm and ctx.user directly as they will have been loaded above
allowedMerge, err := pull_service.IsUserAllowedToMerge(ctx, pr, ctx.userPerm, ctx.user)
if err != nil {
log.Error("Error calculating if allowed to merge: %v", err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Error calculating if allowed to merge: %v", err),
})
return
}
if !allowedMerge {
log.Warn("Forbidden: User %d is not allowed to push to protected branch: %s in %-v and is not allowed to merge pr #%d", ctx.opts.UserID, branchName, repo, pr.Index)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("Not allowed to push to protected branch %s", branchName),
})
return
}
// If we're an admin for the instance, we can ignore checks
if ctx.user.IsAdmin {
return
}
// It's not allowed t overwrite protected files. Unless if the user is an
// admin and the protected branch rule doesn't apply to admins.
if changedProtectedfiles && (!ctx.userPerm.IsAdmin() || protectBranch.ApplyToAdmins) {
log.Warn("Forbidden: Branch: %s in %-v is protected from changing file %s", branchName, repo, protectedFilePath)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("branch %s is protected from changing file %s", branchName, protectedFilePath),
})
return
}
// Check all status checks and reviews are ok
if pb, err := pull_service.CheckPullBranchProtections(ctx, pr, true); err != nil {
if models.IsErrDisallowedToMerge(err) {
// Allow this if the rule doesn't apply to admins and the user is an admin.
if ctx.userPerm.IsAdmin() && !pb.ApplyToAdmins {
return
}
log.Warn("Forbidden: User %d is not allowed push to protected branch %s in %-v and pr #%d is not ready to be merged: %s", ctx.opts.UserID, branchName, repo, pr.Index, err.Error())
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("Not allowed to push to protected branch %s and pr #%d is not ready to be merged: %s", branchName, ctx.opts.PullRequestID, err.Error()),
})
return
}
log.Error("Unable to check if mergeable: protected branch %s in %-v and pr #%d. Error: %v", ctx.opts.UserID, branchName, repo, pr.Index, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to get status of pull request %d. Error: %v", ctx.opts.PullRequestID, err),
})
return
}
}
}
func preReceiveTag(ctx *preReceiveContext, oldCommitID, newCommitID string, refFullName git.RefName) { //nolint:unparam
if !ctx.AssertCanWriteCode() {
return
}
Use the type RefName for all the needed places and fix pull mirror sync bugs (#24634) 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>
2023-05-26 03:04:48 +02:00
tagName := refFullName.TagName()
if !ctx.gotProtectedTags {
var err error
ctx.protectedTags, err = git_model.GetProtectedTags(ctx, ctx.Repo.Repository.ID)
if err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to get protected tags for %-v Error: %v", ctx.Repo.Repository, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: err.Error(),
})
return
}
ctx.gotProtectedTags = true
}
isAllowed, err := git_model.IsUserAllowedToControlTag(ctx, ctx.protectedTags, tagName, ctx.opts.UserID)
if err != nil {
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: err.Error(),
})
return
}
if !isAllowed {
log.Warn("Forbidden: Tag %s in %-v is protected", tagName, ctx.Repo.Repository)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("Tag %s is protected", tagName),
})
return
}
feat(quota): Quota enforcement The previous commit laid out the foundation of the quota engine, this one builds on top of it, and implements the actual enforcement. Enforcement happens at the route decoration level, whenever possible. In case of the API, when over quota, a 413 error is returned, with an appropriate JSON payload. In case of web routes, a 413 HTML page is rendered with similar information. This implementation is for a **soft quota**: quota usage is checked before an operation is to be performed, and the operation is *only* denied if the user is already over quota. This makes it possible to go over quota, but has the significant advantage of being practically implementable within the current Forgejo architecture. The goal of enforcement is to deny actions that can make the user go over quota, and allow the rest. As such, deleting things should - in almost all cases - be possible. A prime exemption is deleting files via the web ui: that creates a new commit, which in turn increases repo size, thus, is denied if the user is over quota. Limitations ----------- Because we generally work at a route decorator level, and rarely look *into* the operation itself, `size:repos:public` and `size:repos:private` are not enforced at this level, the engine enforces against `size:repos:all`. This will be improved in the future. AGit does not play very well with this system, because AGit PRs count toward the repo they're opened against, while in the GitHub-style fork + pull model, it counts against the fork. This too, can be improved in the future. There's very little done on the UI side to guard against going over quota. What this patch implements, is enforcement, not prevention. The UI will still let you *try* operations that *will* result in a denial. Signed-off-by: Gergely Nagy <forgejo@gergo.csillger.hu>
2024-07-06 10:30:16 +02:00
// If the user is over quota, and the push isn't a tag deletion, deny it
if ctx.isOverQuota {
objectFormat := ctx.Repo.GetObjectFormat()
if newCommitID != objectFormat.EmptyObjectID().String() {
ctx.quotaExceeded()
return
}
}
}
func preReceiveFor(ctx *preReceiveContext, oldCommitID, newCommitID string, refFullName git.RefName) { //nolint:unparam
if !ctx.AssertCreatePullRequest() {
return
}
if ctx.Repo.Repository.IsEmpty {
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
UserMsg: "Can't create pull request for an empty repository.",
})
return
}
if ctx.opts.IsWiki {
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
UserMsg: "Pull requests are not supported on the wiki.",
})
return
}
Use the type RefName for all the needed places and fix pull mirror sync bugs (#24634) 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>
2023-05-26 03:04:48 +02:00
baseBranchName := refFullName.ForBranchName()
baseBranchExist := false
if ctx.Repo.GitRepo.IsBranchExist(baseBranchName) {
baseBranchExist = true
}
if !baseBranchExist {
for p, v := range baseBranchName {
if v == '/' && ctx.Repo.GitRepo.IsBranchExist(baseBranchName[:p]) && p != len(baseBranchName)-1 {
baseBranchExist = true
break
}
}
}
if !baseBranchExist {
ctx.JSON(http.StatusForbidden, private.Response{
Refactor internal API for git commands, use meaningful messages instead of "Internal Server Error" (#23687) # Why this PR comes At first, I'd like to help users like #23636 (there are a lot) The unclear "Internal Server Error" is quite anonying, scare users, frustrate contributors, nobody knows what happens. So, it's always good to provide meaningful messages to end users (of course, do not leak sensitive information). When I started working on the "response message to end users", I found that the related code has a lot of technical debt. A lot of copy&paste code, unclear fields and usages. So I think it's good to make everything clear. # Tech Backgrounds Gitea has many sub-commands, some are used by admins, some are used by SSH servers or Git Hooks. Many sub-commands use "internal API" to communicate with Gitea web server. Before, Gitea server always use `StatusCode + Json "err" field` to return messages. * The CLI sub-commands: they expect to show all error related messages to site admin * The Serv/Hook sub-commands (for git clients): they could only show safe messages to end users, the error log could only be recorded by "SSHLog" to Gitea web server. In the old design, it assumes that: * If the StatusCode is 500 (in some functions), then the "err" field is error log, shouldn't be exposed to git client. * If the StatusCode is 40x, then the "err" field could be exposed. And some functions always read the "err" no matter what the StatusCode is. The old code is not strict, and it's difficult to distinguish the messages clearly and then output them correctly. # This PR To help to remove duplicate code and make everything clear, this PR introduces `ResponseExtra` and `requestJSONResp`. * `ResponseExtra` is a struct which contains "extra" information of a internal API response, including StatusCode, UserMsg, Error * `requestJSONResp` is a generic function which can be used for all cases to help to simplify the calls. * Remove all `map["err"]`, always use `private.Response{Err}` to construct error messages. * User messages and error messages are separated clearly, the `fail` and `handleCliResponseExtra` will output correct messages. * Replace all `Internal Server Error` messages with meaningful (still safe) messages. This PR saves more than 300 lines, while makes the git client messages more clear. Many gitea-serv/git-hook related essential functions are covered by tests. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2023-03-29 08:32:26 +02:00
UserMsg: fmt.Sprintf("Unexpected ref: %s", refFullName),
})
return
}
}
func generateGitEnv(opts *private.HookOptions) (env []string) {
env = os.Environ()
if opts.GitAlternativeObjectDirectories != "" {
env = append(env,
private.GitAlternativeObjectDirectories+"="+opts.GitAlternativeObjectDirectories)
}
if opts.GitObjectDirectory != "" {
env = append(env,
private.GitObjectDirectory+"="+opts.GitObjectDirectory)
}
if opts.GitQuarantinePath != "" {
env = append(env,
private.GitQuarantinePath+"="+opts.GitQuarantinePath)
}
return env
}
// loadPusherAndPermission returns false if an error occurs, and it writes the error response
func (ctx *preReceiveContext) loadPusherAndPermission() bool {
if ctx.loadedPusher {
return true
}
Implement actions (#21937) Close #13539. Co-authored by: @lunny @appleboy @fuxiaohei and others. Related projects: - https://gitea.com/gitea/actions-proto-def - https://gitea.com/gitea/actions-proto-go - https://gitea.com/gitea/act - https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner ### Summary The target of this PR is to bring a basic implementation of "Actions", an internal CI/CD system of Gitea. That means even though it has been merged, the state of the feature is **EXPERIMENTAL**, and please note that: - It is disabled by default; - It shouldn't be used in a production environment currently; - It shouldn't be used in a public Gitea instance currently; - Breaking changes may be made before it's stable. **Please comment on #13539 if you have any different product design ideas**, all decisions reached there will be adopted here. But in this PR, we don't talk about **naming, feature-creep or alternatives**. ### ⚠️ Breaking `gitea-actions` will become a reserved user name. If a user with the name already exists in the database, it is recommended to rename it. ### Some important reviews - What is `DEFAULT_ACTIONS_URL` in `app.ini` for? - https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/21937#discussion_r1055954954 - Why the api for runners is not under the normal `/api/v1` prefix? - https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/21937#discussion_r1061173592 - Why DBFS? - https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/21937#discussion_r1061301178 - Why ignore events triggered by `gitea-actions` bot? - https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/21937#discussion_r1063254103 - Why there's no permission control for actions? - https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/21937#discussion_r1090229868 ### What it looks like <details> #### Manage runners <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205870657-c72f590e-2e08-4cd4-be7f-2e0abb299bbf.png"> #### List runs <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205872794-50fde990-2b45-48c1-a178-908e4ec5b627.png"> #### View logs <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205872501-9b7b9000-9542-4991-8f55-18ccdada77c3.png"> </details> ### How to try it <details> #### 1. Start Gitea Clone this branch and [install from source](https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/install-from-source). Add additional configurations in `app.ini` to enable Actions: ```ini [actions] ENABLED = true ``` Start it. If all is well, you'll see the management page of runners: <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205877365-8e30a780-9b10-4154-b3e8-ee6c3cb35a59.png"> #### 2. Start runner Clone the [act_runner](https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner), and follow the [README](https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/src/branch/main/README.md) to start it. If all is well, you'll see a new runner has been added: <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205878000-216f5937-e696-470d-b66c-8473987d91c3.png"> #### 3. Enable actions for a repo Create a new repo or open an existing one, check the `Actions` checkbox in settings and submit. <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205879705-53e09208-73c0-4b3e-a123-2dcf9aba4b9c.png"> <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205879383-23f3d08f-1a85-41dd-a8b3-54e2ee6453e8.png"> If all is well, you'll see a new tab "Actions": <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205881648-a8072d8c-5803-4d76-b8a8-9b2fb49516c1.png"> #### 4. Upload workflow files Upload some workflow files to `.gitea/workflows/xxx.yaml`, you can follow the [quickstart](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/quickstart) of GitHub Actions. Yes, Gitea Actions is compatible with GitHub Actions in most cases, you can use the same demo: ```yaml name: GitHub Actions Demo run-name: ${{ github.actor }} is testing out GitHub Actions 🚀 on: [push] jobs: Explore-GitHub-Actions: runs-on: ubuntu-latest steps: - run: echo "🎉 The job was automatically triggered by a ${{ github.event_name }} event." - run: echo "🐧 This job is now running on a ${{ runner.os }} server hosted by GitHub!" - run: echo "🔎 The name of your branch is ${{ github.ref }} and your repository is ${{ github.repository }}." - name: Check out repository code uses: actions/checkout@v3 - run: echo "💡 The ${{ github.repository }} repository has been cloned to the runner." - run: echo "🖥️ The workflow is now ready to test your code on the runner." - name: List files in the repository run: | ls ${{ github.workspace }} - run: echo "🍏 This job's status is ${{ job.status }}." ``` If all is well, you'll see a new run in `Actions` tab: <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205884473-79a874bc-171b-4aaf-acd5-0241a45c3b53.png"> #### 5. Check the logs of jobs Click a run and you'll see the logs: <img width="1792" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9418365/205884800-994b0374-67f7-48ff-be9a-4c53f3141547.png"> #### 6. Go on You can try more examples in [the documents](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions) of GitHub Actions, then you might find a lot of bugs. Come on, PRs are welcome. </details> See also: [Feature Preview: Gitea Actions](https://blog.gitea.io/2022/12/feature-preview-gitea-actions/) --------- Co-authored-by: a1012112796 <1012112796@qq.com> Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de> Co-authored-by: ChristopherHX <christopher.homberger@web.de> Co-authored-by: John Olheiser <john.olheiser@gmail.com>
2023-01-31 02:45:19 +01:00
if ctx.opts.UserID == user_model.ActionsUserID {
ctx.user = user_model.NewActionsUser()
ctx.userPerm.AccessMode = perm_model.AccessMode(ctx.opts.ActionPerm)
if err := ctx.Repo.Repository.LoadUnits(ctx); err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to get User id %d Error: %v", ctx.opts.UserID, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to get User id %d Error: %v", ctx.opts.UserID, err),
})
return false
}
ctx.userPerm.Units = ctx.Repo.Repository.Units
ctx.userPerm.UnitsMode = make(map[unit.Type]perm_model.AccessMode)
for _, u := range ctx.Repo.Repository.Units {
ctx.userPerm.UnitsMode[u.Type] = ctx.userPerm.AccessMode
}
} else {
user, err := user_model.GetUserByID(ctx, ctx.opts.UserID)
if err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to get User id %d Error: %v", ctx.opts.UserID, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to get User id %d Error: %v", ctx.opts.UserID, err),
})
return false
}
ctx.user = user
userPerm, err := access_model.GetUserRepoPermission(ctx, ctx.Repo.Repository, user)
if err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to get Repo permission of repo %s/%s of User %s: %v", ctx.Repo.Repository.OwnerName, ctx.Repo.Repository.Name, user.Name, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to get Repo permission of repo %s/%s of User %s: %v", ctx.Repo.Repository.OwnerName, ctx.Repo.Repository.Name, user.Name, err),
})
return false
}
ctx.userPerm = userPerm
}
if ctx.opts.DeployKeyID != 0 {
deployKey, err := asymkey_model.GetDeployKeyByID(ctx, ctx.opts.DeployKeyID)
if err != nil {
log.Error("Unable to get DeployKey id %d Error: %v", ctx.opts.DeployKeyID, err)
ctx.JSON(http.StatusInternalServerError, private.Response{
Err: fmt.Sprintf("Unable to get DeployKey id %d Error: %v", ctx.opts.DeployKeyID, err),
})
return false
}
ctx.deployKeyAccessMode = deployKey.Mode
}
ctx.loadedPusher = true
return true
}