Adding the related comment to the issue and pull request status change
in the UI notifications allows to navigate directly to the specific
event in its dedicated view, easing the reading of last comments and to
the editor for additional comments if desired.
The `commit_id` property name is the same as equivalent functionality in
GitHub. If the action was not caused by a commit, an empty string is
used.
This can for example be used to automatically add a Resolved label to an
issue fixed by a commit, or clear it when the issue is reopened.
Previously, there was an `import services/webhooks` inside
`modules/notification/webhook`.
This import was removed (after fighting against many import cycles).
Additionally, `modules/notification/webhook` was moved to
`modules/webhook`,
and a few structs/constants were extracted from `models/webhooks` to
`modules/webhook`.
Co-authored-by: 6543 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <[email protected]>
Change all license headers to comply with REUSE specification.
Fix#16132
Co-authored-by: flynnnnnnnnnn <flynnnnnnnnnn@github>
Co-authored-by: John Olheiser <[email protected]>
This PR adds a context parameter to a bunch of methods. Some helper
`xxxCtx()` methods got replaced with the normal name now.
Co-authored-by: delvh <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <[email protected]>
I found myself wondering whether a PR I scheduled for automerge was
actually merged. It was, but I didn't receive a mail notification for it
- that makes sense considering I am the doer and usually don't want to
receive such notifications. But ideally I want to receive a notification
when a PR was merged because I scheduled it for automerge.
This PR implements exactly that.
The implementation works, but I wonder if there's a way to avoid passing
the "This PR was automerged" state down so much. I tried solving this
via the database (checking if there's an automerge scheduled for this PR
when sending the notification) but that did not work reliably, probably
because sending the notification happens async and the entry might have
already been deleted. My implementation might be the most
straightforward but maybe not the most elegant.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <[email protected]>
At the moment a repository reference is needed for webhooks. With the
upcoming package PR we need to send webhooks without a repository
reference. For example a package is uploaded to an organization. In
theory this enables the usage of webhooks for future user actions.
This PR removes the repository id from `HookTask` and changes how the
hooks are processed (see `services/webhook/deliver.go`). In a follow up
PR I want to remove the usage of the `UniqueQueue´ and replace it with a
normal queue because there is no reason to be unique.
Co-authored-by: 6543 <[email protected]>
Fixes#21379
The commits are capped by `setting.UI.FeedMaxCommitNum` so
`len(commits)` is not the correct number. So this PR adds a new
`TotalCommits` field.
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <[email protected]>
Add support for triggering webhook notifications on wiki changes.
This PR contains frontend and backend for webhook notifications on wiki actions (create a new page, rename a page, edit a page and delete a page). The frontend got a new checkbox under the Custom Event -> Repository Events section. There is only one checkbox for create/edit/rename/delete actions, because it makes no sense to separate it and others like releases or packages follow the same schema.
The actions itself are separated, so that different notifications will be executed (with the "action" field). All the webhook receivers implement the new interface method (Wiki) and the corresponding tests.
When implementing this, I encounter a little bug on editing a wiki page. Creating and editing a wiki page is technically the same action and will be handled by the ```updateWikiPage``` function. But the function need to know if it is a new wiki page or just a change. This distinction is done by the ```action``` parameter, but this will not be sent by the frontend (on form submit). This PR will fix this by adding the ```action``` parameter with the values ```_new``` or ```_edit```, which will be used by the ```updateWikiPage``` function.
I've done integration tests with matrix and gitea (http).
Fix#16457
Signed-off-by: Aaron Fischer <[email protected]>
Sometimes users want to receive email notifications of messages they create or reply to,
Added an option to personal preferences to allow users to choose
Closes#20149
Support synchronizing with the push mirrors whenever new commits are pushed or synced from pull mirror.
Related Issues: #18220
Co-authored-by: delvh <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: zeripath <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <[email protected]>
* Move access and repo permission to models/perm/access
* fix test
* fix git test
* Move functions sequence
* Some improvements per @KN4CK3R and @delvh
* Move issues related code to models/issues
* Move some issues related sub package
* Merge
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Rename some files
We can't depend on `latest` version of gofumpt because the output will
not be stable across versions. Lock it down to the latest version
released yesterday and run it again.
I want to address #17892, where emails notifications are not sent to assignees (issue and PR) and reviewers (PR) when they have the email setting Only email on mention enabled.
From the user experience perspective, when a user gets a issue/PR assigned or a PR review request, he/she would expect to be implicitly mentioned since the assignment or request is personal and targeting a single person only. Thus I see #17892 as a bug. Could we therefore mark this ticket as such?
The changed code just explicitly checks for the EmailNotificationsOnMention setting beside the existing EmailNotificationsEnabled check. Too rude?
@lunny mentioned a mock mail server for tests, is there something ready. How could I make use of it?
#12774 (comment)
Fix#17892
* Start adding mechanism to return unhandled data
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* Create pushback interface
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* Add Pausable interface to WorkerPool and Manager
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* Implement Pausable and PushBack for the bytefifos
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* Implement Pausable and Pushback for ChannelQueues and ChannelUniqueQueues
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* Wire in UI for pausing
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* add testcases and fix a few issues
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* fix build
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* prevent "race" in the test
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* fix jsoniter mismerge
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* fix conflicts
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* fix format
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* Add warnings for no worker configurations and prevent data-loss with redis/levelqueue
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* Use StopTimer
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: techknowlogick <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <[email protected]>
This PR continues the work in #17125 by progressively ensuring that git
commands run within the request context.
This now means that the if there is a git repo already open in the context it will be used instead of reopening it.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
* Some refactors related repository model
* Move more methods out of repository
* Move repository into models/repo
* Fix test
* Fix test
* some improvements
* Remove unnecessary function
* Fix a panic in NotifyCreateIssueComment (caused by string truncation)
* more unit tests
* refactor
* fix some edge cases
* use SplitStringAtByteN for comment content
- Use the provided `doer` instead of `rel.Publisher`. The code will also
run on edited releases and deleted ones, which isn't necessary done by
`rel.Publisher`.
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <[email protected]>
The functioning of the code indexer queue really only makes sense as an unique queue
and doing this allows use to simplify the indexer data to simply delete the data if
the repo is no longer in the db.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <[email protected]>
Jason Song
Felipe Leopoldo Sologuren Gutiérrez
Brecht Van Lommel
delvh
KN4CK3R
Lunny Xiao
flynnnnnnnnnn
kolaente
Aaron F
Tyrone Yeh
Chongyi Zheng
6543
Otto Richter (fnetX)
silverwind
flozzone
zeripath
qwerty287
Gusted
wxiaoguang
pricly-yellow
