Docker/forgejo
Docker/forgejo
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo.git synced 2025-07-24 12:09:39 +02:00
Code Issues Releases Activity
forgejo/modules/actions/workflows_test.go

182 lines
6.9 KiB
Go
Raw Normal View History

Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
// Copyright 2023 The Gitea Authors. All rights reserved.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
package actions
import (
"testing"
chore: branding import path (#7337) - Massive replacement of changing `code.gitea.io/gitea` to `forgejo.org`. - Resolves forgejo/discussions#258 Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/7337 Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org> Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de> Reviewed-by: Beowulf <beowulf@beocode.eu> Reviewed-by: Panagiotis "Ivory" Vasilopoulos <git@n0toose.net> Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz> Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
2025-03-27 19:40:14 +00:00
"forgejo.org/modules/git"
api "forgejo.org/modules/structs"
webhook_module "forgejo.org/modules/webhook"
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
"github.com/stretchr/testify/assert"
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
"github.com/stretchr/testify/require"
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
)
func TestDetectMatched(t *testing.T) {
testCases := []struct {
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc string
commit *git.Commit
triggeredEvent webhook_module.HookEventType
payload api.Payloader
yamlOn string
expected bool
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
}{
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventCreate(create) matches GithubEventCreate(create)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventCreate,
payload: nil,
yamlOn: "on: create",
expected: true,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventIssues(issues) `opened` action matches GithubEventIssues(issues)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventIssues,
payload: &api.IssuePayload{Action: api.HookIssueOpened},
yamlOn: "on: issues",
expected: true,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventIssueComment(issue_comment) `created` action matches GithubEventIssueComment(issue_comment)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventIssueComment,
payload: &api.IssueCommentPayload{Action: api.HookIssueCommentCreated},
yamlOn: "on:\n issue_comment:\n types: [created]",
expected: true,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
{
desc: "HookEventIssues(issues) `milestoned` action matches GithubEventIssues(issues)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventIssues,
payload: &api.IssuePayload{Action: api.HookIssueMilestoned},
yamlOn: "on: issues",
expected: true,
},
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventPullRequestSync(pull_request_sync) matches GithubEventPullRequest(pull_request)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventPullRequestSync,
payload: &api.PullRequestPayload{Action: api.HookIssueSynchronized},
yamlOn: "on: pull_request",
expected: true,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventPullRequest(pull_request) `label_updated` action doesn't match GithubEventPullRequest(pull_request) with no activity type",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventPullRequest,
payload: &api.PullRequestPayload{Action: api.HookIssueLabelUpdated},
yamlOn: "on: pull_request",
expected: false,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
Fix activity type match in `matchPullRequestEvent` (#25746) Fix #25736 Caused by #24048 Right now we only check the activity type for `pull_request` event when `types` is specified or there are no `types` and filter. If a workflow only specifies filters but no `types` like this: ``` on: pull_request: branches: [main] ``` the workflow will be triggered even if the activity type is not one of `[opened, reopened, sync]`. We need to check the activity type in this case. Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
2023-07-08 00:30:07 +08:00
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventPullRequest(pull_request) `closed` action doesn't match GithubEventPullRequest(pull_request) with no activity type",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventPullRequest,
payload: &api.PullRequestPayload{Action: api.HookIssueClosed},
yamlOn: "on: pull_request",
expected: false,
Fix activity type match in `matchPullRequestEvent` (#25746) Fix #25736 Caused by #24048 Right now we only check the activity type for `pull_request` event when `types` is specified or there are no `types` and filter. If a workflow only specifies filters but no `types` like this: ``` on: pull_request: branches: [main] ``` the workflow will be triggered even if the activity type is not one of `[opened, reopened, sync]`. We need to check the activity type in this case. Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
2023-07-08 00:30:07 +08:00
},
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventPullRequest(pull_request) `closed` action doesn't match GithubEventPullRequest(pull_request) with branches",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventPullRequest,
Fix activity type match in `matchPullRequestEvent` (#25746) Fix #25736 Caused by #24048 Right now we only check the activity type for `pull_request` event when `types` is specified or there are no `types` and filter. If a workflow only specifies filters but no `types` like this: ``` on: pull_request: branches: [main] ``` the workflow will be triggered even if the activity type is not one of `[opened, reopened, sync]`. We need to check the activity type in this case. Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
2023-07-08 00:30:07 +08:00
payload: &api.PullRequestPayload{
Action: api.HookIssueClosed,
PullRequest: &api.PullRequest{
Base: &api.PRBranchInfo{},
},
},
yamlOn: "on:\n pull_request:\n branches: [main]",
expected: false,
},
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventPullRequest(pull_request) `label_updated` action matches GithubEventPullRequest(pull_request) with `label` activity type",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventPullRequest,
payload: &api.PullRequestPayload{Action: api.HookIssueLabelUpdated},
yamlOn: "on:\n pull_request:\n types: [labeled]",
expected: true,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventPullRequestReviewComment(pull_request_review_comment) matches GithubEventPullRequestReviewComment(pull_request_review_comment)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventPullRequestReviewComment,
payload: &api.PullRequestPayload{Action: api.HookIssueReviewed},
yamlOn: "on:\n pull_request_review_comment:\n types: [created]",
expected: true,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventPullRequestReviewRejected(pull_request_review_rejected) doesn't match GithubEventPullRequestReview(pull_request_review) with `dismissed` activity type (we don't support `dismissed` at present)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventPullRequestReviewRejected,
payload: &api.PullRequestPayload{Action: api.HookIssueReviewed},
yamlOn: "on:\n pull_request_review:\n types: [dismissed]",
expected: false,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventRelease(release) `published` action matches GithubEventRelease(release) with `published` activity type",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventRelease,
payload: &api.ReleasePayload{Action: api.HookReleasePublished},
yamlOn: "on:\n release:\n types: [published]",
expected: true,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventRelease(updated) `updated` action matches GithubEventRelease(edited) with `edited` activity type",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventRelease,
payload: &api.ReleasePayload{Action: api.HookReleaseUpdated},
yamlOn: "on:\n release:\n types: [edited]",
expected: true,
},
{
desc: "HookEventPackage(package) `created` action doesn't match GithubEventRegistryPackage(registry_package) with `updated` activity type",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventPackage,
payload: &api.PackagePayload{Action: api.HookPackageCreated},
yamlOn: "on:\n registry_package:\n types: [updated]",
expected: false,
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
},
Support triggering workflows by wiki related events (#24119) This PR is to support triggering workflows by wiki related events like creating, editing or deleting wiki pages. In GitHub, this event is called [gollum](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#gollum)
2023-04-18 01:49:47 +08:00
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventWiki(wiki) matches GithubEventGollum(gollum)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventWiki,
payload: nil,
yamlOn: "on: gollum",
expected: true,
Support triggering workflows by wiki related events (#24119) This PR is to support triggering workflows by wiki related events like creating, editing or deleting wiki pages. In GitHub, this event is called [gollum](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#gollum)
2023-04-18 01:49:47 +08:00
},
Fix schedule tasks bugs (#28691) Fix #28157 This PR fix the possible bugs about actions schedule. ## The Changes - Move `UpdateRepositoryUnit` and `SetRepoDefaultBranch` from models to service layer - Remove schedules plan from database and cancel waiting & running schedules tasks in this repository when actions unit has been disabled or global disabled. - Remove schedules plan from database and cancel waiting & running schedules tasks in this repository when default branch changed.
2024-01-13 05:50:38 +08:00
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventSchedule(schedule) matches GithubEventSchedule(schedule)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventSchedule,
payload: nil,
yamlOn: "on: schedule",
expected: true,
Fix schedule tasks bugs (#28691) Fix #28157 This PR fix the possible bugs about actions schedule. ## The Changes - Move `UpdateRepositoryUnit` and `SetRepoDefaultBranch` from models to service layer - Remove schedules plan from database and cancel waiting & running schedules tasks in this repository when actions unit has been disabled or global disabled. - Remove schedules plan from database and cancel waiting & running schedules tasks in this repository when default branch changed.
2024-01-13 05:50:38 +08:00
},
Add support for workflow_dispatch (#3334) Closes #2797 I'm aware of https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/28163 exists, but since I had it laying around on my drive and collecting dust, I might as well open a PR for it if anyone wants the feature a bit sooner than waiting for upstream to release it or to be a forgejo "native" implementation. This PR Contains: - Support for the `workflow_dispatch` trigger - Inputs: boolean, string, number, choice Things still to be done: - [x] API Endpoint `/api/v1/<org>/<repo>/actions/workflows/<workflow id>/dispatches` - ~~Fixing some UI bugs I had no time figuring out, like why dropdown/choice inputs's menu's behave weirdly~~ Unrelated visual bug with dropdowns inside dropdowns - [x] Fix bug where opening the branch selection submits the form - [x] Limit on inputs to render/process Things not in this PR: - Inputs: environment (First need support for environments in forgejo) Things needed to test this: - A patch for https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner to actually consider the inputs inside the workflow. ~~One possible patch can be seen here: https://code.forgejo.org/Mai-Lapyst/runner/src/branch/support-workflow-inputs~~ [PR](https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner/pulls/199) ![image](/attachments/2db50c9e-898f-41cb-b698-43edeefd2573) ## Testing - Checkout PR - Setup new development runner with [this PR](https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner/pulls/199) - Create a repo with a workflow (see below) - Go to the actions tab, select the workflow and see the notice as in the screenshot above - Use the button + dropdown to run the workflow - Try also running it via the api using the `` endpoint - ... - Profit! <details> <summary>Example workflow</summary> ```yaml on: workflow_dispatch: inputs: logLevel: description: 'Log Level' required: true default: 'warning' type: choice options: - info - warning - debug tags: description: 'Test scenario tags' required: false type: boolean boolean_default_true: description: 'Test scenario tags' required: true type: boolean default: true boolean_default_false: description: 'Test scenario tags' required: false type: boolean default: false number1_default: description: 'Number w. default' default: '100' type: number number2: description: 'Number w/o. default' type: number string1_default: description: 'String w. default' default: 'Hello world' type: string string2: description: 'String w/o. default' required: true type: string jobs: test: runs-on: docker steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v3 - run: whoami - run: cat /etc/issue - run: uname -a - run: date - run: echo ${{ inputs.logLevel }} - run: echo ${{ inputs.tags }} - env: GITHUB_CONTEXT: ${{ toJson(github) }} run: echo "$GITHUB_CONTEXT" - run: echo "abc" ``` </details> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/3334 Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org> Co-authored-by: Mai-Lapyst <mai-lapyst@noreply.codeberg.org> Co-committed-by: Mai-Lapyst <mai-lapyst@noreply.codeberg.org>
2024-06-28 05:17:11 +00:00
{
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
desc: "HookEventWorkflowDispatch(workflow_dispatch) matches GithubEventWorkflowDispatch(workflow_dispatch)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventWorkflowDispatch,
payload: nil,
yamlOn: "on: workflow_dispatch",
expected: true,
Add support for workflow_dispatch (#3334) Closes #2797 I'm aware of https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/28163 exists, but since I had it laying around on my drive and collecting dust, I might as well open a PR for it if anyone wants the feature a bit sooner than waiting for upstream to release it or to be a forgejo "native" implementation. This PR Contains: - Support for the `workflow_dispatch` trigger - Inputs: boolean, string, number, choice Things still to be done: - [x] API Endpoint `/api/v1/<org>/<repo>/actions/workflows/<workflow id>/dispatches` - ~~Fixing some UI bugs I had no time figuring out, like why dropdown/choice inputs's menu's behave weirdly~~ Unrelated visual bug with dropdowns inside dropdowns - [x] Fix bug where opening the branch selection submits the form - [x] Limit on inputs to render/process Things not in this PR: - Inputs: environment (First need support for environments in forgejo) Things needed to test this: - A patch for https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner to actually consider the inputs inside the workflow. ~~One possible patch can be seen here: https://code.forgejo.org/Mai-Lapyst/runner/src/branch/support-workflow-inputs~~ [PR](https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner/pulls/199) ![image](/attachments/2db50c9e-898f-41cb-b698-43edeefd2573) ## Testing - Checkout PR - Setup new development runner with [this PR](https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner/pulls/199) - Create a repo with a workflow (see below) - Go to the actions tab, select the workflow and see the notice as in the screenshot above - Use the button + dropdown to run the workflow - Try also running it via the api using the `` endpoint - ... - Profit! <details> <summary>Example workflow</summary> ```yaml on: workflow_dispatch: inputs: logLevel: description: 'Log Level' required: true default: 'warning' type: choice options: - info - warning - debug tags: description: 'Test scenario tags' required: false type: boolean boolean_default_true: description: 'Test scenario tags' required: true type: boolean default: true boolean_default_false: description: 'Test scenario tags' required: false type: boolean default: false number1_default: description: 'Number w. default' default: '100' type: number number2: description: 'Number w/o. default' type: number string1_default: description: 'String w. default' default: 'Hello world' type: string string2: description: 'String w/o. default' required: true type: string jobs: test: runs-on: docker steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v3 - run: whoami - run: cat /etc/issue - run: uname -a - run: date - run: echo ${{ inputs.logLevel }} - run: echo ${{ inputs.tags }} - env: GITHUB_CONTEXT: ${{ toJson(github) }} run: echo "$GITHUB_CONTEXT" - run: echo "abc" ``` </details> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/3334 Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org> Co-authored-by: Mai-Lapyst <mai-lapyst@noreply.codeberg.org> Co-committed-by: Mai-Lapyst <mai-lapyst@noreply.codeberg.org>
2024-06-28 05:17:11 +00:00
},
[gitea] week 2025-22 cherry pick (gitea/main -> forgejo) (#8198) ## Checklist - [x] go to the last cherry-pick PR (forgejo/forgejo#8040) to figure out how far it went: [gitea@d5bbaee64e](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/d5bbaee64e44327e78e39ad7a1977e21ddc59e1c) - [x] cherry-pick and open PR (forgejo/forgejo#8198) - [ ] have the PR pass the CI - end-to-end (specially important if there are actions related changes) - [ ] add `run-end-to-end` label - [ ] check the result - [ ] write release notes - [ ] assign reviewers - [ ] 48h later, last call - merge 1 hour after the last call ## Legend - :question: - No decision about the commit has been made. - :cherries: - The commit has been cherry picked. - :fast_forward: - The commit has been skipped. - :bulb: - The commit has been skipped, but should be ported to Forgejo. - :writing_hand: - The commit has been skipped, and a port to Forgejo already exists. ## Commits - :cherries: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/17cfae82a5e8357f90701815b11c9bc615d0f7e8) -> [`forgejo`](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/commit/6397da88d30de0a470dabadb8e27fbb202d75458) Hide href attribute of a tag if there is no target_url ([gitea#34556](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34556)) - :cherries: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/b408bf2f0bb6e76e73421e63128f08d42047e7c0) -> [`forgejo`](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/commit/46bc899d57515fc5349e9113e92da2e4b0d93c75) Fix: skip paths check on tag push events in workflows ([gitea#34602](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34602)) - :cherries: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/9165ea8713adb959b6dda4e64bee1a9b2f818288) -> [`forgejo`](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/commit/04332f31bfd8a1c0e8676e4764d44e087f1ccc30) Only activity tab needs heatmap data loading ([gitea#34652](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34652)) - :cherries: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/3f7dbbdaf1dbec3b741b3b883f7e44104e77c80b) -> [`forgejo`](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/commit/2a9019fd0491684cdeab6d50a16e5cffaef5508b) Small fix in Pull Requests page ([gitea#34612](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34612)) - :cherries: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/497b83b75d567e6ee867d6be41ce37c4cee74e7e) -> [`forgejo`](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/commit/9a83cc7bad79fe79447bf6e3cb3144292f922ebb) Fix migration pull request title too long ([gitea#34577](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34577)) ## TODO - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/6b8b5802185f8ba3cd2d0416cc5640fe758ea532) Refactor container and UI ([gitea#34736](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34736)) Packages: Fix for container, needs careful merge. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/bbee652e293dd761c1d1255a14106e6b9f726003) Prevent duplicate form submissions when creating forks ([gitea#34714](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34714)) Fork: Fix, needs careful merge. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/d21ce9fa0739a954e2ecbc5d2aa1e324b5781a4b) Improve the performance when detecting the file editable ([gitea#34653](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34653)) LFS: Performance improvement - needs careful merge. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/8fed27bf6a8a7582a3b2afcda7842b735f6ea5bd) Fix various problems ([gitea#34708](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34708)) Various: Fixes, tests missing. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/c9505a26b9c4147bc7098e20de732a415669520e) Improve instance wide ssh commit signing ([gitea#34341](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34341)) CodeSign: Nice feature - needs careful merge. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/fbc3796f9e26e38e1ab8624d5d9ab24ccf1ba6ac) Fix pull requests API convert panic when head repository is deleted. ([gitea#34685](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34685)) Pull: Fix, needs careful merge. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/1610a63bfd9e243a0d1ad8a5d05a5ae011a957a9) Fix commit message rendering and some UI problems ([gitea#34680](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34680)) Various Fixes - needs carefull merge. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/0082cb51fa381338c8f96076f90f9e7a49909f8e) Fix last admin check when syncing users ([gitea#34649](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34649)) oidc: fix "first user is always admin". Needs careful merge. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/c6b2cbd75d290b3b831d9b0ee8b47270e68b273b) Fix footnote jump behavior on the issue page. ([gitea#34621](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34621)) Issues: Fix Markdown rendering. Needs carefull merge ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/7a59f5a8253402d6f98234bf0047ec53156d3af9) Ignore "Close" error when uploading container blob ([gitea#34620](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34620)) No issue, no test. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/6d0b24064a922ee8195a7a7cb858823763bac524) Keeping consistent between UI and API about combined commit status state and fix some bugs ([gitea#34562](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34562)) Next PR in Commit-Status story. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/f6041441ee280faba5f06ec4b7a78c35a402bf87) Refactor FindOrgOptions to use enum instead of bool, fix membership visibility ([gitea#34629](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34629)) Just for a common sense here: How should I consider refactorings? ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/cc942e2a86152939305b30373b618536d46aedca) Fix GetUsersByEmails ([gitea#34643](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34643)) User: Seems to fix email validation - but seems not to be finished. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/7fa5a88831141f9e7b858e282558e786b7e95716) Add `--color-logo` for text that should match logo color ([gitea#34639](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34639)) UI: Nice idea - can we adapt this? ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/47d69b7749689a7a7570ac20bdfd30d336daf7c1) Validate hex colors when creating/editing labels ([gitea#34623](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34623)) Label: Color validation but needs careful merge. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/108db0b04f007a0dc03262cb100aa1fe7b80e785) Fix possible pull request broken when leave the page immediately after clicking the update button ([gitea#34509](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34509)) Nice fix for a bug hard to trace down. Needs careful merge & think about whether a test is possible. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/79cc3698928cdddec433199ac4d9339b4bfcde7d) Fix issue label delete incorrect labels webhook payload ([gitea#34575](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34575)) Small fix but would expect a test, showing what was fixed. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/fe57ee3074c1d6421845bce67e9c580a14e2529e) fixed incorrect page navigation with up and down arrow on last item of dashboard repos ([gitea#34570](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34570)) Small & simple - but tests are missing. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/4e471487fbc680c89985d6afa10724e53739ae8b) Remove unnecessary duplicate code ([gitea#34552](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34552)) Fix arround "Split GetLatestCommitStatus". ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/c5e78fc7addd29b8949883134bc0d5339f64341e) Do not mutate incoming options to SearchRepositoryByName ([gitea#34553](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34553)) Large refactoring to simplify options handling. But needs careful merge. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/f48c0135a611bd8e59b4262c9d2514bda6bb91c1) Fix/improve avatar sync from LDAP ([gitea#34573](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34573)) Nice fix but needs test. ------ - :bulb: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/e8d8984f7c2c49c91bb24ac9c0d86e92a8ec795a) Fix some trivial problems ([gitea#34579](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34579)) Various fixes, tests missing. ------ ## Skipped - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/637070e07bd34c914162cc479aa1683507d9cb14) Fix container range bug ([gitea#34725](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34725)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/0d3e9956cd73b78514a0507eb05446dcc9b7b8cc) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/28debdbe00a51ae031d539f95919351032254695) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/dcc9206a597e9f77a9ecedb0201f48af1e64f258) Raise minimum Node.js version to 20, test on 24 ([gitea#34713](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34713)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/bc28654b49e7bea0ee3088977c86b29b5c032fca) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/65986f423fd7718e8c0afc68261d2655bf60571c) Refactor embedded assets and drop unnecessary dependencies ([gitea#34692](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34692)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/18bafcc3785e0afe66b8c1188bb940eb5bb864a6) Bump minimum go version to 1.24.4 ([gitea#34699](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34699)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/8d135ef5cf2cd64ae7311ef23469689ed333de9d) Update JS deps ([gitea#34701](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34701)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/d5893ee260d6fa7cb1919748555fc1d69b9145cb) Fix markdown wrap ([gitea#34697](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34697)) - gitea UI specific specific ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/06ccb3a1d46433aa0dda24f697f7586f3024c032) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/94db956e319232b35a12d4f2e186b188a88a1be2) frontport changelog ([gitea#34689](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34689)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/d5afdccde82e7f00e54d140533308fe76bf41783) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/e9f5105e9502c4cedd19b7f6dde02adee8caff2a) Migrate to urfave v3 ([gitea#34510](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34510)) already in Forgejo - see https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8035 ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/2c341b6803622772619621e2620755a0ddce07e8) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/92e7e98c565235cd24db82679aa801dace2d1bd8) Update x/crypto package and make builtin SSH use default parameters ([gitea#34667](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34667)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/7b39c8258779363e2071b6171726166c58f843ae) Fix "oras" OCI client compatibility ([gitea#34666](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34666)) Already in forgejo - see https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/8070 ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/1fe652cd2697b5bb459741f988782163a091c6c8) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/a9a705f4db95dfcfd21a0ad4fcb8f6a7a8809ff5) Fix missed merge commit sha and time when migrating from codecommit ([gitea#34645](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34645)) Migration: Seems to be an important fix, but no tests. As I know @earl-warren worked hard on migration, is this still relevant to us? ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/1e0758a9f1aade415de434163bb0f6363dc6ca50) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/f6f6aedd4fe918df7b5b3593dd1a4e65f6b2ae10) Update JS deps, regenerate SVGs ([gitea#34640](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34640)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/aa2b3b2b1fdaf37917014770cd6bef3a2a5028a3) Misc CSS fixes ([gitea#34638](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34638)) - gitea UI specific specific ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/b38f2d31fdcd1fc5facda86be33d3f830503f538) add codecommit to supported services in api docs ([gitea#34626](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34626)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/74a0178c6a9c28da6ab76545b466ed68c569eb75) add openssh-keygen to rootless image ([gitea#34625](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34625)) already in Forgejo - see https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/6896 ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/5b22af4373c3936a951dd91da38860a830fcf743) bump to alpine 3.22 ([gitea#34613](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34613)) ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/9e0e107d236022d550d077da7aa9af415ac02f8a) Fix notification count positioning for variable-width elements ([gitea#34597](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34597)) - gitea UI specific specific ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/e5781cec75d7ba350fb9162b3882192574c80429) Fix margin issue in markup paragraph rendering ([gitea#34599](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34599)) - gitea UI specific specific ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/375dab111198e6432b303a3c29b8e91bec95d361) Make pull request and issue history more compact ([gitea#34588](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34588)) - gitea UI specific specific ------ - :fast_forward: [`gitea`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/2a1585b32ea2c3cb961cd1aedf4117d880255a53) Refactor some tests ([gitea#34580](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/34580)) ------ <details> <summary><h2>Stats</h2></summary> <br> Between [`gitea@d5bbaee64e`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/d5bbaee64e44327e78e39ad7a1977e21ddc59e1c) and [`gitea@6b8b580218`](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/6b8b5802185f8ba3cd2d0416cc5640fe758ea532), **55** commits have been reviewed. We picked **5**, skipped **28** (of which **3** were already in Forgejo!), and decided to port **22**. </details> Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: NorthRealm <155140859+NorthRealm@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: TheFox0x7 <thefox0x7@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: endo0911engineer <161911062+endo0911engineer@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/8198 Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org> Co-authored-by: Michael Jerger <michael.jerger@meissa-gmbh.de> Co-committed-by: Michael Jerger <michael.jerger@meissa-gmbh.de>
2025-06-17 18:28:07 +02:00
{
desc: "push to tag matches workflow with paths condition (should skip paths check)",
triggeredEvent: webhook_module.HookEventPush,
payload: &api.PushPayload{
Ref: "refs/tags/v1.0.0",
Before: "0000000",
Commits: []*api.PayloadCommit{
{
ID: "abcdef123456",
Added: []string{"src/main.go"},
Message: "Release v1.0.0",
},
},
},
commit: nil,
yamlOn: "on:\n push:\n paths:\n - src/**",
expected: true,
},
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
}
for _, tc := range testCases {
t.Run(tc.desc, func(t *testing.T) {
evts, err := GetEventsFromContent([]byte(tc.yamlOn))
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
require.NoError(t, err)
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
assert.Len(t, evts, 1)
test: add more workflow event coverage
2024-07-31 00:15:22 +02:00
assert.Equal(t, tc.expected, detectMatched(nil, tc.commit, tc.triggeredEvent, tc.payload, evts[0]))
Fix mismatch between hook events and github event types (#24048) Some workflow trigger events can have multiple activity types, such as `issues` and `pull_request`, and user can specify which types can trigger the workflow. See GitHub documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows Now some hook events cannot match the workflow trigger events correctly because we don't check the activity types. For example, `pull_request_label` is an individual hook event. But there isn't a `pull_request_label` workflow trigger event, we can only use `pull_request` event's `label` activity type. If we don't check the activity types, the workflows without the `label` activity type may be triggered by the `pull_request_label` event by mistake. We need to improve the match logic. - [x] [`issues` ](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issues) - [x] [`issue_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment) - [x] [`pull_request`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request) - [x] [`pull_request_review`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review) - [x] [`pull_request_review_comment`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_review_comment) - [x] [`release`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#release) - [x] [`registry_package`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#registry_package)
2023-04-13 00:16:47 +08:00
})
}
}
Copy permalink