## Fixes#36983
## Summary
1. Add transitional `Cancelling` status (between `Running` and
`Cancelled`); cancel flow marks active tasks `Cancelling`, runner
finalizes to `Cancelled` on terminal result.
2. Taskless jobs cancel directly (no runner to finalize).
3. Runner-protocol responses map `Cancelling` → `RESULT_CANCELLED`.
4. Run/job aggregation treats `Cancelling` as active.
5. Status mapping/aggregation tests + en-US locale added.
**Problem**
When a workflow was cancelled from the UI, jobs were marked cancelled
immediately, which could skip post-run cleanup behavior.
## Solution
Use a transitional status path:
Running → Cancelling → Cancelled
This allows runner finalization and cleanup path execution before final
terminal state.
**Testing**
> 1. go test -tags "sqlite sqlite_unlock_notify" ./models/actions -run
"TestAggregateJobStatus|TestStatusAsResult|TestStatusFromResult"
> 2. go run
github.com/golangci/golangci-lint/v2/cmd/golangci-lint@v2.11.4 run
./models/actions/... ./routers/api/actions/runner/...
## Related
- act_runner: https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/pulls/825 —
independent; this PR's capability gate keeps legacy runners on the
immediate-cancel path. The new flow activates only for runners that
advertise the `cancelling` capability.
Co-authored-by: Nicolas <bircni@icloud.com>
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: Claude (Opus 4.7) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: Zettat123 <zettat123@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
- Introduce a “Bypass Protection Allowlist” on branch rules
(users/teams) alongside admins, with BlockAdminMergeOverride
still respected.
- Surface the allowlist in API (create/edit options, structs) and
settings UI; merge box now shows the red button +
message for bypass-capable users.
- Apply bypass logic to merge checks and pre-receive so allowlisted
users can override unmet approvals/status checks/
protected files when force-merging.
- Add migration for new columns, locale strings, and unit tests (bypass
helper; queue test tweak).
<img width="1069" height="218" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0b61bc2a-a27f-47f3-a923-613688008e65"
/>
Fixes#36476
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Codex GPT-5.3 <codex@openai.com>
Co-authored-by: GPT-5.2 <noreply@openai.com>
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude (Opus 4.7) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This PR adds a new repository API field, `mirror_last_sync_at`, to
expose the timestamp of the last successful pull mirror sync.
Unlike `mirror_updated`, this field does not affect mirror scheduling
and is updated only after a successful pull sync. Failed sync attempts
leave the value unchanged.
What changed
- added `mirror_last_sync_at` to the repository API response
- updated pull mirror sync flow to persist the timestamp only on
successful sync
- kept `mirror_updated` behavior unchanged for queue/scheduling purposes
`mirror_updated` is currently tied to mirror queue behavior, so it
cannot safely represent the last successful sync time. The new field
makes that state explicit for API consumers without changing scheduling
semantics.
---------
Signed-off-by: pomidorry <106489913+Pomidorry@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: Claude (Opus 4.7) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
This PR introduces a new `ActionRunAttempt` model and makes Actions
execution attempt-scoped.
**Main Changes**
- Each workflow run trigger generates a new `ActionRunAttempt`. The
triggered jobs are then associated with this new `ActionRunAttempt`
record.
- Each rerun now creates:
- a new `ActionRunAttempt` record for the workflow run
- a full new set of `ActionRunJob` records for the new
`ActionRunAttempt`
- For jobs that need to be rerun, the new job records are created as
runnable jobs in the new attempt.
- For jobs that do not need to be rerun, new job records are still
created in the new attempt, but they reuse the result of the previous
attempt instead of executing again.
- Introduce `rerunPlan` to manage each rerun and refactored rerun flow
into a two-phase plan-based model:
- `buildRerunPlan`
- `execRerunPlan`
- `RerunFailedWorkflowRun` and `RerunFailed` no longer directly derives
all jobs that need to be rerun; this step is now handled by
`buildRerunPlan`.
- Converted artifacts from run-scoped to attempt-scoped:
- uploads are now associated with `RunAttemptID`
- listing, download, and deletion resolve against the current attempt
- Added attempt-aware web Actions views:
- the default run page shows the latest attempt
(`/actions/runs/{run_id}`)
- previous attempt pages show jobs and artifacts for that attempt
(`/actions/runs/{run_id}/attempts/{attempt_num}`)
- New APIs:
- `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/actions/runs/{run}/attempts/{attempt}`
- `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/actions/runs/{run}/attempts/{attempt}/jobs`
- New configuration `MAX_RERUN_ATTEMPTS`
- https://gitea.com/gitea/docs/pulls/383
**Compatibility**
- Existing legacy runs use `LatestAttemptID = 0` and legacy jobs use
`RunAttemptID = 0`. Therefore, these fields can be used to identify
legacy runs and jobs and provide backward compatibility.
- If a legacy run is rerun, an `ActionRunAttempt` with `attempt=1` will
be created to represent the original execution. Then a new
`ActionRunAttempt` with `attempt=2` will be created for the real rerun.
- Existing artifact records are not backfilled; legacy artifacts
continue to use `RunAttemptID = 0`.
**Improvements**
- It is now easier to inspect and download logs from previous attempts.
-
[`run_attempt`](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/reference/workflows-and-actions/contexts#github-context)
semantics are now aligned with GitHub.
- > A unique number for each attempt of a particular workflow run in a
repository. This number begins at 1 for the workflow run's first
attempt, and increments with each re-run.
- Rerun behavior is now clearer and more explicit.
- Instead of mutating the status of previous jobs in place, each rerun
creates a new attempt with a full new set of job records.
- Artifacts produced by different reruns can now be listed separately.
Signed-off-by: Zettat123 <zettat123@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Follow up #36842
Migration `326` can be prohibitively slow on large instances because it
scans and rewrites all commit status target URLs generated by Gitea
Actions in the database. This PR refactors migration `326` to perform a
partial update instead of rewriting every legacy target URL. The reason
for this partial rewrite is that **smaller legacy run/job indexes are
the most likely to be ambiguous with run/job ID-based URLs** during
runtime resolution, so this change prioritizes that subset while
avoiding the cost of rewriting all legacy records.
To preserve access to old links, this PR introduces
`resolveCurrentRunForView` to handle both ID-based URLs and index-based
URLs:
- For job pages (`/actions/runs/{run}/jobs/{job}`), it first tries to
confirm that the URL is ID-based. It does so by checking whether `{job}`
can be treated as an existing job ID in the repository and whether that
job belongs to `{run}`. If that match cannot be confirmed, it falls back
to treating the URL as legacy `run index + job index`, resolves the
corresponding run and job, and redirects to the correct ID-based URL.
- When both ID-based and index-based interpretations are valid at the
same time, the resolver **prefers the ID-based interpretation by
default**. For example, if a repository contains one run-job pair
(`run_id=3, run_index=2, job_id=4`), and also another run-job pair
(`run_id=1100, run_index=3, job_id=1200, job_index=4`), then
`/actions/runs/3/jobs/4` is ambiguous. In that case, the resolver treats
it as the ID-based URL by default and shows the page for `run_id=3,
job_id=4`. Users can still explicitly force the legacy index-based
interpretation with `?by_index=1`, which would resolve the same URL to
`/actions/runs/1100/jobs/1200`.
- For run summary pages (`/actions/runs/{run}`), it uses a best-effort
strategy: by default it first treats `{run}` as a run ID, and if no such
run exists in the repository, it falls back to treating `{run}` as a
legacy run index and redirects to the ID-based URL. Users can also
explicitly force the legacy interpretation with `?by_index=1`.
- This summary-page compatibility is best-effort, not a strict ambiguity
check. For example, if a repository contains two runs: runA (`id=7,
index=3`) and runB (`id=99, index=7`), then `/actions/runs/7` will
resolve to runA by default, even though the old index-based URL
originally referred to runB.
The table below shows how valid legacy index-based target URLs are
handled before and after migration `326`. Lower-range legacy URLs are
rewritten to ID-based URLs, while higher-range legacy URLs remain
unchanged in the database but are still handled correctly by
`resolveCurrentRunForView` at runtime.
| run_id | run_index | job_id | job_index | old target URL | updated by
migration 326 | current target URL | can be resolved correctly |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 2 | 4 | 1 | `/user2/repo2/actions/runs/2/jobs/1` | true |
`/user2/repo2/actions/runs/3/jobs/4` | true |
| 4 | 3 | 8 | 4 | `/user2/repo2/actions/runs/3/jobs/4` | true |
`/user2/repo2/actions/runs/4/jobs/8` | true (without migration 326, this
URL will resolve to run(`id=3`)) |
| 80 | 20 | 170 | 0 | `/user2/repo2/actions/runs/20/jobs/0` | true |
`/user2/repo2/actions/runs/80/jobs/170` | true |
| 1500 | 900 | 1600 | 0 | `/user2/repo2/actions/runs/900/jobs/0` | false
| `/user2/repo2/actions/runs/900/jobs/0` | true |
| 2400 | 1500 | 2600 | 0 | `/user2/repo2/actions/runs/1500/jobs/0` |
false | `/user2/repo2/actions/runs/1500/jobs/0` | true |
| 2400 | 1500 | 2601 | 1 | `/user2/repo2/actions/runs/1500/jobs/1` |
false | `/user2/repo2/actions/runs/1500/jobs/1` | true |
For users who already ran the old migration `326`, this change has no
functional impact. Their historical URLs are already stored in the
ID-based form, and ID-based URLs continue to resolve correctly.
For users who have not run the old migration `326`, only a subset of
legacy target URLs will now be rewritten during upgrade. This avoids the
extreme runtime cost of the previous full migration, while all remaining
legacy target URLs continue to work through the web-layer compatibility
logic.
Many thanks to @wxiaoguang for the suggestions.
Add an optional Name field to webhooks so users can give them
human-readable labels instead of relying only on URLs. The webhook
overview page now displays names when available, or falls back to the
URL for unnamed webhooks.
Fixes#37025
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
## Overview
This PR introduces granular permission controls for Gitea Actions tokens
(`GITEA_TOKEN`), aligning Gitea's security model with GitHub Actions
standards while maintaining compatibility with Gitea's unique repository
unit system.
It addresses the need for finer access control by allowing
administrators and repository owners to define default token
permissions, set maximum permission ceilings, and control
cross-repository access within organizations.
## Key Features
### 1. Granular Token Permissions
- **Standard Keyword Support**: Implements support for the
`permissions:` keyword in workflow and job YAML files (e.g., `contents:
read`, `issues: write`).
- **Permission Modes**:
- **Permissive**: Default write access for most units (backwards
compatible).
- **Restricted**: Default read-only access for `contents` and
`packages`, with no access to other units.
- ~~**Custom**: Allows defining specific default levels for each unit
type (Code, Issues, PRs, Packages, etc.).~~**EDIT removed UI was
confusing**
- **Clamping Logic**: Workflow-defined permissions are automatically
"clamped" by repository or organization-level maximum settings.
Workflows cannot escalate their own permissions beyond these limits.
### 2. Organization & Repository Settings
- **Settings UI**: Added new settings pages at both Organization and
Repository levels to manage Actions token defaults and maximums.
- **Inheritance**: Repositories can be configured to "Follow
organization-level configuration," simplifying management across large
organizations.
- **Cross-Repository Access**: Added a policy to control whether Actions
workflows can access other repositories or packages within the same
organization. This can be set to "None," "All," or restricted to a
"Selected" list of repositories.
### 3. Security Hardening
- **Fork Pull Request Protection**: Tokens for workflows triggered by
pull requests from forks are strictly enforced as read-only, regardless
of repository settings.
- ~~**Package Access**: Actions tokens can now only access packages
explicitly linked to a repository, with cross-repo access governed by
the organization's security policy.~~ **EDIT removed
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/36173#issuecomment-3873675346**
- **Git Hook Integration**: Propagates Actions Task IDs to git hooks to
ensure that pushes performed by Actions tokens respect the specific
permissions granted at runtime.
### 4. Technical Implementation
- **Permission Persistence**: Parsed permissions are calculated at job
creation and stored in the `action_run_job` table. This ensures the
token's authority is deterministic throughout the job's lifecycle.
- **Parsing Priority**: Implemented a priority system in the YAML parser
where the broad `contents` scope is applied first, allowing granular
scopes like `code` or `releases` to override it for precise control.
- **Re-runs**: Permissions are re-evaluated during a job re-run to
incorporate any changes made to repository settings in the interim.
### How to Test
1. **Unit Tests**: Run `go test ./services/actions/...` and `go test
./models/repo/...` to verify parsing logic and permission clamping.
2. **Integration Tests**: Comprehensive tests have been added to
`tests/integration/actions_job_token_test.go` covering:
- Permissive vs. Restricted mode behavior.
- YAML `permissions:` keyword evaluation.
- Organization cross-repo access policies.
- Resource access (Git, API, and Packages) under various permission
configs.
3. **Manual Verification**:
- Navigate to **Site/Org/Repo Settings -> Actions -> General**.
- Change "Default Token Permissions" and verify that newly triggered
workflows reflect these changes in their `GITEA_TOKEN` capabilities.
- Attempt a cross-repo API call from an Action and verify the Org policy
is enforced.
## Documentation
Added a PR in gitea's docs for this :
https://gitea.com/gitea/docs/pulls/318
## UI:
<img width="1366" height="619" alt="Screenshot 2026-01-24 174112"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/bfa29c9a-4ea5-4346-9410-16d491ef3d44"
/>
<img width="1360" height="621" alt="Screenshot 2026-01-24 174048"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d5ec46c8-9a13-4874-a6a4-fb379936cef5"
/>
/fixes #24635
/claim #24635
---------
Signed-off-by: Excellencedev <ademiluyisuccessandexcellence@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: ChristopherHX <christopher.homberger@web.de>
Signed-off-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Signed-off-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: ChristopherHX <christopher.homberger@web.de>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: Zettat123 <zettat123@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
This PR migrates the web Actions run/job routes from index-based
`runIndex` or `jobIndex` to database IDs.
**⚠️ BREAKING ⚠️**: Existing saved links/bookmarks that use the old
index-based URLs will no longer resolve after this change.
Improvements of this change:
- Previously, `jobIndex` depended on list order, making it hard to
locate a specific job. Using `jobID` provides stable addressing.
- Web routes now align with API, which already use IDs.
- Behavior is closer to GitHub, which exposes run/job IDs in URLs.
- Provides a cleaner base for future features without relying on list
order.
- #36388 this PR improves the support for reusable workflows. If a job
uses a reusable workflow, it may contain multiple child jobs, which
makes relying on job index to locate a job much more complicated
---------
Signed-off-by: Zettat123 <zettat123@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Extend the maximum length of comment.treepath from 255 to 4000
characters.
All databases supported by Gitea allow VARCHAR fields of 4000, so
compatibility is ensured. Git itself does not impose a strict limit on
path length. On Windows, the `core.longpaths` setting has already been
enabled to handle long file paths.
Fix#33716
---------
Signed-off-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
This PR upgrade xorm to v1.3.10 which fixed a bug when both `longtext
json` tags in the struct field. The `longtext` will be ignored and
`json` will be considered as `text`.
A migration has been introduced to modify the column directly to
longtext. And another two columns should also be migrated from text to
longtext.
All these changes only affect mysql database because for other databases
Gitea supported, text is the same as longtext.
Fix#27244Fix#34764Fix#35042
Fix#880
Design:
1. A global setting `security.TWO_FACTOR_AUTH`.
* To support org-level config, we need to introduce a better "owner
setting" system first (in the future)
2. A user without 2FA can login and may explore, but can NOT read or
write to any repositories via API/web.
3. Keep things as simple as possible.
* This option only aggressively suggest users to enable their 2FA at the
moment, it does NOT guarantee that users must have 2FA before all other
operations, it should be good enough for real world use cases.
* Some details and tests could be improved in the future since this
change only adds a check and seems won't affect too much.
---------
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Fix#2616
This PR adds a new sort option for exclusive labels.
For exclusive labels, a new property is exposed called "order", while in
the UI options are populated automatically in the `Sort` column (see
screenshot below) for each exclusive label scope.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Follow #33127
This PR add backend logic and test for "anonymous access", it shares the
same logic as "everyone access", so not too much change.
By the way, split `SettingsPost` into small functions to make it easier
to make frontend-related changes in the future.
Next PR will add frontend support for "anonymous access"
When there are over 5M records on `action` table, the heatmap on
dashboard is very slow as below SQL.
```
database duration=1.8881s db.sql="SELECT created_unix DIV 900 * 900 AS timestamp, count(user_id) as contributions FROM `action` WHERE user_id=? AND act_user_id=? AND (created_unix > ?) GROUP BY timestamp ORDER BY timestamp"
```
This PR add a new index for `action` table with columns `user_id`,
`act_user_id` and `created_unix` so that this query will become about 6
times faster than before.
Noticed a SQL in gitea.com has a bigger load. It seems both `is_pull`
and `pin_order` are not indexed columns in the database.
```SQL
SELECT `id`, `repo_id`, `index`, `poster_id`, `original_author`, `original_author_id`, `name`, `content`, `content_version`, `milestone_id`, `priority`, `is_closed`, `is_pull`, `num_comments`, `ref`, `pin_order`, `deadline_unix`, `created_unix`, `updated_unix`, `closed_unix`, `is_locked`, `time_estimate` FROM `issue` WHERE (repo_id =?) AND (is_pull = 0) AND (pin_order > 0) ORDER BY pin_order
```
I came across a comment
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/24406#issuecomment-1527747296
from @delvh , which presents a more reasonable approach. Based on this,
this PR will migrate all issue and pull request pin data from the
`issue` table to the `issue_pin` table. This change benefits larger
Gitea instances by improving scalability and performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Resolve#32341
~Depends on #27151~
- [x] It will display a checkbox of deleting the head branch on the pull
request view page when starting an auto-merge task.
- [x] Add permission check before deleting the branch
- [x] Add delete branch comment for those closing pull requests because
of head branch or base branch was deleted.
- [x] Merge `RetargetChildrenOnMerge` and `AddDeletePRBranchComment`
into `service.DeleteBranch`.
## Solves
Currently for rules to re-order them you have to alter the creation
date. so you basicly have to delete and recreate them in the right
order. This is more than just inconvinient ...
## Solution
Add a new col for prioritization
## Demo WebUI Video
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/92182a31-9705-4ac5-b6e3-9bb74108cbd1
---
*Sponsored by Kithara Software GmbH*
Index SQL: `CREATE INDEX u_s_uu ON notification(user_id, status,
updated_unix);`
The naming follows `action.go` in the same dir.
I am unsure which version I should add SQL to the migration folder, so I
have not modified it.
Fix#32390
This introduces a new flag `BlockAdminMergeOverride` on the branch
protection rules that prevents admins/repo owners from bypassing branch
protection rules and merging without approvals or failing status checks.
Fixes#17131
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Fixes#22722
### Problem
Currently, it is not possible to force push to a branch with branch
protection rules in place. There are often times where this is necessary
(CI workflows/administrative tasks etc).
The current workaround is to rename/remove the branch protection,
perform the force push, and then reinstate the protections.
### Solution
Provide an additional section in the branch protection rules to allow
users to specify which users with push access can also force push to the
branch. The default value of the rule will be set to `Disabled`, and the
UI is intuitive and very similar to the `Push` section.
It is worth noting in this implementation that allowing force push does
not override regular push access, and both will need to be enabled for a
user to force push.
This applies to manual force push to a remote, and also in Gitea UI
updating a PR by rebase (which requires force push)
This modifies the `BranchProtection` API structs to add:
- `enable_force_push bool`
- `enable_force_push_whitelist bool`
- `force_push_whitelist_usernames string[]`
- `force_push_whitelist_teams string[]`
- `force_push_whitelist_deploy_keys bool`
### Updated Branch Protection UI:
<img width="943" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/79623665/7491899c-d816-45d5-be84-8512abd156bf">
### Pull Request `Update branch by Rebase` option enabled with source
branch `test` being a protected branch:
<img width="1038" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/assets/79623665/57ead13e-9006-459f-b83c-7079e6f4c654">
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
The target_url is necessary for the UI, but missed in
commit_status_summary table. This PR fix it.
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
This PR adds a new table named commit status summary to reduce queries
from the commit status table. After this change, commit status summary
table will be used for the final result, commit status table will be for
details.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jason Song <i@wolfogre.com>
