Template
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo synced 2024-11-24 10:46:10 +01:00
Commit graph

4 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
TheFox0x7 4de909747b Add testifylint to lint checks (#4535)
go-require lint is ignored for now

Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/4535
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: TheFox0x7 <thefox0x7@gmail.com>
Co-committed-by: TheFox0x7 <thefox0x7@gmail.com>
2024-07-30 19:41:10 +00:00
KN4CK3R 838db2f891
Convert to url auth to header auth in tests (#28484)
Related #28390
2023-12-21 23:59:59 +00:00
Jack Hay 18de83b2a3
Redesign Scoped Access Tokens (#24767)
## Changes
- Adds the following high level access scopes, each with `read` and
`write` levels:
    - `activitypub`
    - `admin` (hidden if user is not a site admin)
    - `misc`
    - `notification`
    - `organization`
    - `package`
    - `issue`
    - `repository`
    - `user`
- Adds new middleware function `tokenRequiresScopes()` in addition to
`reqToken()`
  -  `tokenRequiresScopes()` is used for each high-level api section
- _if_ a scoped token is present, checks that the required scope is
included based on the section and HTTP method
  - `reqToken()` is used for individual routes
- checks that required authentication is present (but does not check
scope levels as this will already have been handled by
`tokenRequiresScopes()`
- Adds migration to convert old scoped access tokens to the new set of
scopes
- Updates the user interface for scope selection

### User interface example
<img width="903" alt="Screen Shot 2023-05-31 at 1 56 55 PM"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/23248839/654766ec-2143-4f59-9037-3b51600e32f3">
<img width="917" alt="Screen Shot 2023-05-31 at 1 56 43 PM"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/23248839/1ad64081-012c-4a73-b393-66b30352654c">

## tokenRequiresScopes  Design Decision
- `tokenRequiresScopes()` was added to more reliably cover api routes.
For an incoming request, this function uses the given scope category
(say `AccessTokenScopeCategoryOrganization`) and the HTTP method (say
`DELETE`) and verifies that any scoped tokens in use include
`delete:organization`.
- `reqToken()` is used to enforce auth for individual routes that
require it. If a scoped token is not present for a request,
`tokenRequiresScopes()` will not return an error

## TODO
- [x] Alphabetize scope categories
- [x] Change 'public repos only' to a radio button (private vs public).
Also expand this to organizations
- [X] Disable token creation if no scopes selected. Alternatively, show
warning
- [x] `reqToken()` is missing from many `POST/DELETE` routes in the api.
`tokenRequiresScopes()` only checks that a given token has the correct
scope, `reqToken()` must be used to check that a token (or some other
auth) is present.
   -  _This should be addressed in this PR_
- [x] The migration should be reviewed very carefully in order to
minimize access changes to existing user tokens.
   - _This should be addressed in this PR_
- [x] Link to api to swagger documentation, clarify what
read/write/delete levels correspond to
- [x] Review cases where more than one scope is needed as this directly
deviates from the api definition.
   - _This should be addressed in this PR_
   - For example: 
   ```go
	m.Group("/users/{username}/orgs", func() {
		m.Get("", reqToken(), org.ListUserOrgs)
		m.Get("/{org}/permissions", reqToken(), org.GetUserOrgsPermissions)
}, tokenRequiresScopes(auth_model.AccessTokenScopeCategoryUser,
auth_model.AccessTokenScopeCategoryOrganization),
context_service.UserAssignmentAPI())
   ```

## Future improvements
- [ ] Add required scopes to swagger documentation
- [ ] Redesign `reqToken()` to be opt-out rather than opt-in
- [ ] Subdivide scopes like `repository`
- [ ] Once a token is created, if it has no scopes, we should display
text instead of an empty bullet point
- [ ] If the 'public repos only' option is selected, should read
categories be selected by default

Closes #24501
Closes #24799

Co-authored-by: Jonathan Tran <jon@allspice.io>
Co-authored-by: Kyle D <kdumontnu@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
2023-06-04 20:57:16 +02:00
JakobDev aaa1094663
Add the ability to pin Issues (#24406)
This adds the ability to pin important Issues and Pull Requests. You can
also move pinned Issues around to change their Position. Resolves #2175.

## Screenshots

![grafik](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/15185051/235123207-0aa39869-bb48-45c3-abe2-ba1e836046ec.png)

![grafik](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/15185051/235123297-152a16ea-a857-451d-9a42-61f2cd54dd75.png)

![grafik](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/15185051/235640782-cbfe25ec-6254-479a-a3de-133e585d7a2d.png)

The Design was mostly copied from the Projects Board.

## Implementation
This uses a new `pin_order` Column in the `issue` table. If the value is
set to 0, the Issue is not pinned. If it's set to a bigger value, the
value is the Position. 1 means it's the first pinned Issue, 2 means it's
the second one etc. This is dived into Issues and Pull requests for each
Repo.

## TODO
- [x] You can currently pin as many Issues as you want. Maybe we should
add a Limit, which is configurable. GitHub uses 3, but I prefer 6, as
this is better for bigger Projects, but I'm open for suggestions.
- [x] Pin and Unpin events need to be added to the Issue history.
- [x] Tests
- [x] Migration

**The feature itself is currently fully working, so tester who may find
weird edge cases are very welcome!**

---------

Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
2023-05-25 15:17:19 +02:00