## Overview
Hi all, I'm a first-time contributor to Forgejo. I was looking for something interesting to contribute and the first thing that caught my attention was https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/6043, a request for an enhancement to include "issue previews" when publishing links to social media platforms. As a bit of background, the way these platforms work is that they search for meta tags in the posted link's content, and if they find a meta `og:image` (along with other meta tags) they'll pull the image to include in the social media post. Forgejo currently provides an `og:image` tag but it just renders the repository or repository-owner's avatar.
This PR will render `og:image` for an issue or PR into a link to `{...}/summary-card`, which is a dynamically generated image that contains a summary of the issue.
## Design Notes
### Rendering / Rasterization
The tricky part of solving this problem is rendering an image that combines some text, some images, and some layout elements. To address this, I've created a `card` module which allows for a handful of operations:
- Create a new rendered image (a "Card")
- Add a margin to a card
- Split the card, horizontally or vertically, into two pieces with a proportional layout (eg. 70%/30%, as desired), each of which are "Cards" that render into the same root image
- Render text into a card, with line-wrapping and text-alignment capabilities
- Render an image onto a card
- Fetches an external image as safely as possible (for server-side fetch of Gravatar, etc.)
The card module can be reused to create `og:image` summary cards for any object in the future, although obviously it's capabilities are limited. The current implementation is on issues/PRs.
I considered a few alternative approaches before taking this approach, and here's why I rejected those options:
- Provide the summary card as an SVG object which could be rendered much more easily with a template file -- however, support for SVG isn't defined as positive for OpenGraph, and a quick look through some existing implementations suggest that it is not widely supported, if at all
- Rendering as HTML/CSS, or SVG, and then using an external tool to convert into a PNG (or other static) image -- this would be much nicer and easier to implement, but would require tying in some very heavy-weight dependencies
- Rendering using a more sophisticated graphics library, eg. cairo -- also would be nicer and easier to implement, but again a heavy dependency for a small functionality
As a result of the limited capabilities of the new card module, summary cards don't have icons on them (which would require SVG rasterization) or pretty status badges with colors and rounded rects. In the future if better drawing capabilities were added, the graphics could be improved, but it doesn't seem too important.
### External Avatars
In order to rasterize a user's avatar onto the summary card, it might have to be retrieved by the server from the external source (eg. Gravatar). A `fetchExternalImage` routine attempts to do this in the safest way possible to protect the server from any possible security exposure from this; (a) verifying that the content-types are acceptable, (b) ensuring that the file-size and image-size are within the safe bounds that are used for custom avatars, (c) using a very-short timeout to avoid stalling the server if an external dependency is offline.
### Caching
Summary cards are cached after rendered. This has the downside of causing updates to statuses, avatars, titles, etc. being stale on the summary card for the cache TTL. However, during testing I found that some social media engines like Mastodon will cause the summary card to be accessed a significant number of times after being referenced by a post, causing a mini-tornado of requests. The cache compensates for this to avoid server load in this situation.
### Scope
I'm considering out-of-scope:
- Summary cards on other objects (eg. repos, users) can be left for future implementation
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- ~~I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...~~ n/a, no JS changes
- [x] ~~in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.~~
- [x] ~~in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).~~
- Manual testing
- [x] Access & attach screenshots of both an issue and a pull-request's summary card; see below
- [x] Ensure reasonable (non-crash) behavior of rendering text with glyphs outside the font -- correctly rendered as replacement unicode chars
- [x] Using a public test instance, verify that og:image behavior looks good on platforms like Mastodon and BlueSky
- [x] Bluesky: ✅
- [x] Mastodon: ✅ (Note that the summary card will be requested many times as the post is federated; either each server, or each client, will fetch it itself)
- [x] OpenGraph test site (https://www.opengraph.xyz/): ✅
- [x] Discord: Looks OK ✅; needs "twitter:card" to be set to "summary_large_image" to display the large-scale image, but (a) that's probably annoying to use, (b) probably wrong because it doesn't match Twitter Card's spec for a "photographic image", and (c) don't want to encourage/continue use of vendor-specific tag
- [x] Verify cases with user avatar missing (or autogen), and repo avatar missing (falls back to repo owner avatar)
Pull request summary card:
Issue summary card:
(images to the right are the custom repo avatar, w/ fallback to the repo owner avatar)
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
- OpenGraph capabilities are expected to work in the background without user awareness, and so there is no need for documentation to explain the capabilities for users.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/6053
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
- Currently the TOTP secrets are stored using the `secrets` module with
as key the MD5 hash of the Secretkey, the `secrets` module uses general
bad practices. This patch migrates the secrets to use the `keying`
module (#5041) which is easier to use and use better practices to store
secrets in databases.
- Migration test added.
- Remove the Forgejo migration databases, and let the gitea migration
databases also run forgejo migration databases. This is required as the
Forgejo migration is now also touching tables that the forgejo migration
didn't create itself.
Confine the search menu to be at most the width of the page, or 80% of
the viewport width, whichever is smaller. To do this, introduce a new
`--container-width` variable for the descendant elements of
`.ui.container` to be able to access.
Also update the relevant e2e test: add a long 'lorem ipsum' page, add a
search for it, parameterize the width.
When running e2e tests on flaky networks, gravatar can cause a timeout
and test failures. Turn off, and populate avatars on e2e test suite run
to make them reliable.
(cherry picked from commit 9ac74a1a408136455a9e0586fb8e65163048597b)
Conflicts:
models/fixtures/user.yml
services/repository/contributors_graph_test.go
trivial context conflicts
Extend API MarkupOptions to contain branch path.
The `api.MarkupOptions{}` to have `BranchPath` which contains the
current branch. The `RenderMarkup` function utilizes a struct since there
are too many variables passed as arguments and that is not a good sign
for readability.
And `repo-editor.js` will contain a new form data which is `branch-path`
which will then be utilized by `edit.tmpl` as `data-branch-path`.
Closes: #4510
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [x] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [ ] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/5781
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Nirmal Kumar R <tildezero@gmail.com>
Co-committed-by: Nirmal Kumar R <tildezero@gmail.com>
It is possible to set a Email for a Organization. This Email is optional and only used to be displayed on the profile page. However, once you set an EMail, you can no longer remove it. This PR fixes that.
While working on the tests, I found out, that the API returns a 500 when trying to set an invalid EMail. I fixed that too. It returns a 422 now.
Fixes#4567
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/5517
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Otto <otto@codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: JakobDev <jakobdev@gmx.de>
Co-committed-by: JakobDev <jakobdev@gmx.de>
Git has a cool feature called git notes. It allows adding a text to a commit without changing the commit itself. Forgejo already displays git notes. With this PR you can also now change git notes.
<details>
<summary>Screenshots</summary>
</details>
## Checklist
The [developer guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/developer/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
<!--start release-notes-assistant-->
## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Features
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/4753): <!--number 4753 --><!--line 0 --><!--description QWxsb3cgY2hhbmdpbmcgZ2l0IG5vdGVz-->Allow changing git notes<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/4753
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: JakobDev <jakobdev@gmx.de>
Co-committed-by: JakobDev <jakobdev@gmx.de>
Refactoring of #32211
this move the PublicOnly() filter calcuation next to the DB querys and
let it be decided by the Doer
---
*Sponsored by Kithara Software GmbH*
(cherry picked from commit 43c252dfeaf9ab03c4db3e7ac5169bc0d69901ac)
Conflicts:
models/organization/org_test.go
models/organization/org_user_test.go
routers/web/org/home.go
rather simple conflict resolution but not trivial
tests/integration/user_count_test.go had to be adapted (simple)
because it does not exist in Gitea and uses the modified model
- Only send a review request based on the code owner file if the code
owner user has read permissions to the pull requests of that repository.
- This avoids leaking title of PRs from private repository when a
CODEOWNER file is present which contains users that do not have access
to the private repository.
- Found by @oliverpool.
- Integration test added.
- Remember if fuzzy was set or not for the open/close/all states.
- Use `fuzzy=false` for test, as `fuzzy=true` is the default (this is
the opposite of all the other values).
- Remove `ctx.Link` prefix for open/close states, this makes them
suspectible to the existing tests (the other filter links are also in
the format of simply having `?xx=xx&yy=yy`).
- Fix typo in test name.
Fix#32427
(cherry picked from commit 35bcd667b23de29a7b0d0bf1090fb10961d3aca3)
Conflicts:
- tests/integration/repo_tag_test.go
Resolved by manually copying the added test, and also manually
adjusting the imported Go modules.
- Ensure that the specified push mirror ID belongs to the requested
repository, otherwise it is possible to modify the intervals of the push
mirrors that do not belong to the requested repository.
- Integration test added.
- If a repository is forked to a private or limited user/organization,
the fork should not be visible in the list of forks depending on the
doer requesting the list of forks.
- Added integration testing for web and API route.
- The RSS and atom feed for branches exposes details about the code, it
therefore should be guarded by the requirement that the doer has access
to the code of that repository.
- Added integration testing.
- This unifies the security behavior of enrolling security keys with
enrolling TOTP as a 2FA method. When TOTP is enrolled, you cannot use
basic authorization (user:password) to make API request on behalf of the
user, this is now also the case when you enroll security keys.
- The usage of access tokens are the only method to make API requests on
behalf of the user when a 2FA method is enrolled for the user.
- Integration test added.
- If the incoming mail feature is enabled, tokens are being sent with
outgoing mails. These tokens contains information about what type of
action is allow with such token (such as replying to a certain issue
ID), to verify these tokens the code uses the HMAC-SHA256 construction.
- The output of the HMAC is truncated to 80 bits, because this is
recommended by RFC2104, but RFC2104 actually doesn't recommend this. It
recommends, if truncation should need to take place, it should use
max(80, hash_len/2) of the leftmost bits. For HMAC-SHA256 this works out
to 128 bits instead of the currently used 80 bits.
- Update to token version 2 and disallow any usage of token version 1,
token version 2 are generated with 128 bits of HMAC output.
- Add test to verify the deprecation of token version 1 and a general
MAC check test.
- Add a `purpose` column, this allows the `forgejo_auth_token` table to
be used by other parts of Forgejo, while still enjoying the
no-compromise architecture.
- Remove the 'roll your own crypto' time limited code functions and
migrate them to the `forgejo_auth_token` table. This migration ensures
generated codes can only be used for their purpose and ensure they are
invalidated after their usage by deleting it from the database, this
also should help making auditing of the security code easier, as we're
no longer trying to stuff a lot of data into a HMAC construction.
-Helper functions are rewritten to ensure a safe-by-design approach to
these tokens.
- Add the `forgejo_auth_token` to dbconsistency doctor and add it to the
`deleteUser` function.
- TODO: Add cron job to delete expired authorization tokens.
- Unit and integration tests added.
- Optimize generting random files.
- Reduce big file of 128MiB to 32MiB (git was never made for large files
anyways, but simply tests that it works).
- Reduce looped git operations from 100 iterations to 10.
- Add extra print statements to know what a slow test is doing, this
also helps to see if a particular piece of code in a slow test is the
culprit or if the test is just very extensive.
- Set `[ui.notification].EVENT_SOURCE_UPDATE_TIME` to 1s to speed up
`TestEventSourceManagerRun`.
- Sneaked in some general test improvements.
