Commit graph

7 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
TheFox0x7
4de909747b Add testifylint to lint checks ()
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
Gusted
138942c09e
[CHORE] Move test related function to own package
- Go's deadcode eliminator is quite simple, if you put a public function
in a package `aa/bb` that is used only by tests, it would still be built
if package `aa/bb` was imported. This means that if such functions use
libraries relevant only to tests that those libraries would still be
be built and increase the binary size of a Go binary.
- This is also the case with Forgejo, `models/migrations/base/tests.go`
contained functions exclusively used by tests which (skipping some steps
here) imports https://github.com/ClickHouse/clickhouse-go, which is
2MiB. The `code.gitea.io/gitea/models/migrations/base` package is
imported by `cmd/doctor` and thus the code of the clickhouse library is
also built and included in the Forgejo binary, although entirely unused
and not reachable.
- This patch moves the test-related functions to their own package, so
Go's deadcode eliminator knows not to build the test-related functions
and thus reduces the size of the Forgejo binary.
- It is not possible to move this to a `_test.go` file because Go does
not allow importing functions from such files, so any test helper
function must be in a non-test package and file.
- Reduction of size (built with `TAGS="sqlite sqlite_unlock_notify" make
build`):
  - Before: 95912040 bytes (92M)
  - After: 92306888 bytes (89M)
2024-07-14 17:00:49 +02:00
silverwind
88f835192d
Replace interface{} with any ()
Result of running `perl -p -i -e 's#interface\{\}#any#g' **/*` and `make fmt`.

Basically the same [as golang did](2580d0e08d).
2023-07-04 18:36:08 +00:00
delvh
0f4e1b9ac6
Restructure webhook module ()
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 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
2023-01-01 23:23:15 +08:00
flynnnnnnnnnn
e81ccc406b
Implement FSFE REUSE for golang files ()
Change all license headers to comply with REUSE specification.

Fix 

Co-authored-by: flynnnnnnnnnn <flynnnnnnnnnn@github>
Co-authored-by: John Olheiser <john.olheiser@gmail.com>
2022-11-27 18:20:29 +00:00
Lunny Xiao
91c7a3e66f
Fix tests on migrations () 2022-11-08 12:07:46 +08:00
oliverpool
b6e81357bd
Add Webhook authorization header ()
_This is a different approach to , I took the liberty of adapting
some parts, see below_

## Context

In some cases, a weebhook endpoint requires some kind of authentication.
The usual way is by sending a static `Authorization` header, with a
given token. For instance:

- Matrix expects a `Bearer <token>` (already implemented, by storing the
header cleartext in the metadata - which is buggy on retry )
- TeamCity 
- Gitea instances 
- SourceHut https://man.sr.ht/graphql.md#authentication-strategies (this
is my actual personal need :)

## Proposed solution

Add a dedicated encrypt column to the webhook table (instead of storing
it as meta as proposed in ), so that it gets available for all
present and future hook types (especially the custom ones ).

This would also solve the buggy matrix retry .

As a first step, I would recommend focusing on the backend logic and
improve the frontend at a later stage. For now the UI is a simple
`Authorization` field (which could be later customized with `Bearer` and
`Basic` switches):


![2022-08-23-142911](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3864879/186162483-5b721504-eef5-4932-812e-eb96a68494cc.png)

The header name is hard-coded, since I couldn't fine any usecase
justifying otherwise.

## Questions

- What do you think of this approach? @justusbunsi @Gusted @silverwind 
- ~~How are the migrations generated? Do I have to manually create a new
file, or is there a command for that?~~
- ~~I started adding it to the API: should I complete it or should I
drop it? (I don't know how much the API is actually used)~~

## Done as well:

- add a migration for the existing matrix webhooks and remove the
`Authorization` logic there


_Closes #19872_

Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <williamzijl7@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
2022-11-03 20:23:20 +02:00