This pull request updates the handling of issue label events in
workflows to distinguish between label additions and deletions,
introduces corresponding test cases, and extends the `IssuePayload`
structure to support this functionality.
### Enhancements to issue label event handling:
* Updated `matchIssuesEvent` in `modules/actions/workflows.go` to
differentiate between "labeled" and "unlabeled" events based on whether
labels were added or removed.
* Added a new field, `RemovedLabels`, to the `IssuePayload` struct in
`modules/structs/hook.go` to track labels that were removed during an
issue event.
### Testing improvements:
* Added `TestMatchIssuesEvent` in `modules/actions/workflows_test.go` to
cover scenarios such as label addition, label deletion, and label
clearing, ensuring the correct event type is triggered.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
## Summary
Fix skipping of `paths` condition in workflows triggered by tag push
events.
## Details
- Ensure workflows triggered by tag pushes bypass the `paths` filter
check.
- Prevent incorrect skipping of workflows due to `paths` conditions on
tag pushes.
- Added and updated unit tests to verify correct behavior.
This PR adds "View workflow file" to Actions list page, and replaces the
redundant link.
Related #34530
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
* download endpoint has to use 302 redirect
* fake blob download used if direct download not possible
* downloading v3 artifacts not possible
New repo apis based on GitHub Rest V3
- GET /runs/{run}/artifacts (Cannot use run index of url due to not
being unique)
- GET /artifacts
- GET + DELETE /artifacts/{artifact_id}
- GET /artifacts/{artifact_id}/zip
- (GET /artifacts/{artifact_id}/zip/raw this is a workaround for a http
302 assertion in actions/toolkit)
- api docs removed this is protected by a signed url like the internal
artifacts api and no longer usable with any token or swagger
- returns http 401 if the signature is invalid
- or change the artifact id
- or expired after 1 hour
Closes#33353Closes#32124
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Support compression for Actions logs to save storage space and
bandwidth. Inspired by
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/24256#issuecomment-1521153015
The biggest challenge is that the compression format should support
[seekable](https://github.com/facebook/zstd/blob/dev/contrib/seekable_format/zstd_seekable_compression_format.md).
So when users are viewing a part of the log lines, Gitea doesn't need to
download the whole compressed file and decompress it.
That means gzip cannot help here. And I did research, there aren't too
many choices, like bgzip and xz, but I think zstd is the most popular
one. It has an implementation in Golang with
[zstd](https://github.com/klauspost/compress/tree/master/zstd) and
[zstd-seekable-format-go](https://github.com/SaveTheRbtz/zstd-seekable-format-go),
and what is better is that it has good compatibility: a seekable format
zstd file can be read by a regular zstd reader.
This PR introduces a new package `zstd` to combine and wrap the two
packages, to provide a unified and easy-to-use API.
And a new setting `LOG_COMPRESSION` is added to the config, although I
don't see any reason why not to use compression, I think's it's a good
idea to keep the default with `none` to be consistent with old versions.
`LOG_COMPRESSION` takes effect for only new log files, it adds `.zst` as
an extension to the file name, so Gitea can determine if it needs
decompression according to the file name when reading. Old files will
keep the format since it's not worth converting them, as they will be
cleared after #31735.
<img width="541" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e9598764-a4e0-4b68-8c2b-f769265183c9">
1. Fix incorrect `HookEventType` for issue-related events in
`IssueChangeAssignee`
2. Add `case "types"` in the `switch` block in `matchPullRequestEvent`
to avoid warning logs
Fix#29175
Replace #29207
This PR makes some improvements to the `issue_comment` workflow trigger
event.
1. Fix the bug that pull requests cannot trigger `issue_comment`
workflows
2. Previously the `issue_comment` event only supported the `created`
activity type. This PR adds support for the missing `edited` and
`deleted` activity types.
3. Some events (including `issue_comment`, `issues`, etc. ) only trigger
workflows that belong to the workflow file on the default branch. This
PR introduces the `IsDefaultBranchWorkflow` function to check for these
events.
Fix#29166
Add support for the following activity types of `pull_request`
- assigned
- unassigned
- review_requested
- review_request_removed
- milestoned
- demilestoned
In #28691, schedule plans will be deleted when a repo's actions unit is
disabled. But when the unit is enabled, the schedule plans won't be
created again.
This PR fixes the bug. The schedule plans will be created again when the
actions unit is re-enabled
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.
Replace #22751
1. only support the default branch in the repository setting.
2. autoload schedule data from the schedule table after starting the
service.
3. support specific syntax like `@yearly`, `@monthly`, `@weekly`,
`@daily`, `@hourly`
## How to use
See the [GitHub Actions
document](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#schedule)
for getting more detailed information.
```yaml
on:
schedule:
- cron: '30 5 * * 1,3'
- cron: '30 5 * * 2,4'
jobs:
test_schedule:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- name: Not on Monday or Wednesday
if: github.event.schedule != '30 5 * * 1,3'
run: echo "This step will be skipped on Monday and Wednesday"
- name: Every time
run: echo "This step will always run"
```
Signed-off-by: Bo-Yi.Wu <appleboy.tw@gmail.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Jason Song <i@wolfogre.com>
Co-authored-by: techknowlogick <techknowlogick@gitea.io>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Follow #25229
Copy from
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/26290#issuecomment-1663135186
The bug is that we cannot get changed files for the
`pull_request_target` event. This event runs in the context of the base
branch, so we won't get any changes if we call
`GetFilesChangedSinceCommit` with `PullRequest.Base.Ref`.
Follow #25229
At present, when the trigger event is `pull_request_target`, the `ref`
and `sha` of `ActionRun` are set according to the base branch of the
pull request. This makes it impossible for us to find the head branch of
the `ActionRun` directly. In this PR, the `ref` and `sha` will always be
set to the head branch and they will be changed to the base branch when
generating the task context.
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>
Fix#25451.
Bugfixes:
- When stopping the zombie or endless tasks, set `LogInStorage` to true
after transferring the file to storage. It was missing, it could write
to a nonexistent file in DBFS because `LogInStorage` was false.
- Always update `ActionTask.Updated` when there's a new state reported
by the runner, even if there's no change. This is to avoid the task
being judged as a zombie task.
Enhancement:
- Support `Stat()` for DBFS file.
- `WriteLogs` refuses to write if it could result in content holes.
---------
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Fix#25088
This PR adds the support for
[`pull_request_target`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_target)
workflow trigger. `pull_request_target` is similar to `pull_request`,
but the workflow triggered by the `pull_request_target` event runs in
the context of the base branch of the pull request rather than the head
branch. Since the workflow from the base is considered trusted, it can
access the secrets and doesn't need approvals to run.
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>
Follow #23037
Fix [#22598
comment](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/22958#issuecomment-1475763042)
Workflows with `pull_request` trigger event can't be triggered by
`pull_request_sync` event. This PR adds the `canGithubEventMatch`
function to check if a Github event can match any Gitea event. If the
Github event matches a Gitea event, the related workflows should be
triggered.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
caused by #22680
`pushPayload.Ref` and `prPayload.PullRequest.Base.Ref` have the format
like `refs/heads/<branch_name>`, so we need to trim the prefix before
comparing.
#21937 implemented only basic events based on name because of `act`'s
limitation. So I sent a PR to parse all possible events details in
https://gitea.com/gitea/act/pulls/11 and it merged. The ref
documentation is
https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows
This PR depends on that and make more detail responses for `push` events
and `pull_request` events. And it lefts more events there for future
PRs.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jason Song <i@wolfogre.com>
wxiaoguang
Sumit
Risu
ChristopherHX
silverwind
endo0911engineer
NorthRealm
Zettat123
yp05327
Jason Song
Chongyi Zheng
sillyguodong
Lunny Xiao
Vitaliy Filippov
a1012112796
