Removes the legacy `delete-button` handler (`initGlobalDeleteButton`)
and migrates all remaining usages to `link-action` and `show-modal` /
`form-fetch-action`.
Two handlers are adjusted for the new request shape: webauthn key delete
reads `id` from the query, and account deletion returns `JSONError` on
validation failure.
A E2E test ist added to cover one of the use cases.
Suggested in
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/38046#discussion_r3414936737.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: bircni <bircni@icloud.com>
Closes#37670.
Today, org members in Gitea only see teams they're a member of. In
larger orgs that hurts onboarding and discoverability — there's no way
to look up which team owns what without asking around. GitHub solves
this with a per-team visibility setting; this PR brings the same model
to Gitea.
## What changes
- Every team gets a `visibility` setting:
- `private` *(default)* — only team members and org owners can see the
team. Same as today's behavior.
- `limited` — listable by any member of the organization. Members and
the repos the team has access to are visible too. Non-org-members still
see nothing.
- `public` — listable by any signed-in user.
- The Owners team visibility is fixed and cannot be changed via
settings.
- Existing teams default to `private`, so this is a no-op for anyone who
doesn't change anything.
## API
- `Team`, `CreateTeamOption`, `EditTeamOption` all gain a `visibility`
field (string enum: `private` | `limited` | `public`).
- `GET /orgs/{org}/teams` and `/orgs/{org}/teams/search` now apply the
same visibility rules as the web UI:
- site admins and org owners still see every team
- other org members see their own teams plus any `limited` or `public`
team
- `private` teams are no longer leaked through these endpoints
- Swagger/OpenAPI specs regenerated.
## UI
View from admin2 (not an owner):
<img width="1669" height="726"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/daf4bccb-644b-4426-b178-71963aeaf73b"
/>
View from admin (owner):
<img width="2559" height="863"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/4f22cebc-e9df-4fd2-8ed4-724d31fadb7a"
/>
---------
Signed-off-by: bircni <bircni@icloud.com>
Co-authored-by: TheFox0x7 <thefox0x7@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Purpose:
1. Make the whole code base have unified "item" layout
2. Clarify our "list" styles: "flex-relaxed-list", "flex-divided-list"
3. Prepare to replace legacy "ui relaxed list"
* https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/37445#discussion_r3144458865
4. Prepare for refactoring the "pull merge box", it needs the
"flex-divided-list"
* related to "Refactor pull request view (*)" like #37451
5. Fix legacy abuses of "flex-list", e.g.: repo home sidebar
`RepoTransfer` now is at models, but if we want to move it into `repo`
model, it will depend on `Team`. So this PR also makes repo model depend
on org model to make it possible. Just refactor, no code change.
- [x] Move `DeleteOrganization` from `models/organization` to service
layer
- [x] Move `AccessibleTeamReposEnv` to `models/repo`
- [x] Move `RepoTransfer` from `models` to `models/repo`
- [x] Merge `getUserTeamIDs` and `GetUserTeamIDs`, Merge `GetUserTeams`
and `getUserTeams`.
- [x] Remove `Team`'s `Repos []*repo_model.Repository` to avoid dependency recycle.
- `.text-thin` and `.text-italic` are not present in CSS so were doing nothing and I removed them.
- `.text.middle` was unused so I removed it.
- `.text.italic` is replaced with `tw-italic`.
- `.text.normal` had exactly one use and it wasn't even needed.
- add a `muted` class to the link to `org_profile_avatar.tmpl`.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
We have to define this one in helpers.css because tailwind only
generates a single class but certain things rely on this being
double-class. Command ran:
```sh
perl -p -i -e 's#gt-hidden#tw-hidden#g' web_src/js/**/* templates/**/* models/**/* web_src/css/**/*
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Fixes https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/30005. Regression from
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/29945.
There was only once instance of `tw-content-center` before that PR, so I
just ran below command and reverted that one instance.
```sh
perl -p -i -e 's#tw-content-center#tw-items-center#g' web_src/js/**/* templates/**/* models/**/* tests/**/*
```
Per the discussion on #22054, the flow for adding a new team member to
an org is not intuitive for new Gitea users.
The ideal solution would be to add a new button on the Org > Members
index view (see the screenshot mockup in the issue description).
However, this would require a refactor of the UX for the flow. The
current flow has an implicit context of which team within the org the
new member is being added to ('Owners' by default). From the Members
index, there is no implicit context; the flow would have to add a picker
for which team the new member should be added to.
So, as a stopgap, this change simply adds a button to the Teams index
page that performs the same action as clicking on the title of the team
(a behavior that is currently too obscure as indicated in the comments
on the issue). This should reduce support burden and serve as a decent
temporary measure until the Add Member flow is refactored.
---------
Co-authored-by: tomholford <tomholford@users.noreply.github.com>
1. There is already `gt-ac`, so no need to introduce `flex-item-center`
2. The `flex-item-baseline` and `.flex-item-icon svg { margin-top: 1px
}` seem to be a tricky patch, they don't resolve the root problem, and
still cause misalignment in some cases.
* The root problem is: the "icon" needs to align with the sibling
"title"
* So, make the "icon" and the "title" both have the same height
3. `flex-text-inline` could only be used if the element is really
"inline", otherwise its `vertical-align` would make the box size change.
In most cases, `flex-text-block` is good enough.
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Each change is tested manually line by line. There are too many changes
so I can't share dozens of screenshots.
In short:
1. `ui right` could be still used in `ui top attached header`, because
there is a special case.
2. A lot of `ui right` are just no-op, so they can be removed safely.
3. Some of the `ui right` should be replaced by `gt-float-right` (to
avoid breaking, leave them to the future).
4. A few of the `ui right` could be rewritten by flex.
So I found this [linter](https://github.com/Riverside-Healthcare/djlint)
which features a mode for go templates, so I gave it a try and it did
find a number of valid issue, like unbalanced tags etc. It also has a
number of bugs, I had to disable/workaround many issues.
Given that this linter is written in python, this does add a dependency
on `python` >= 3.8 and `poetry` to the development environment to be
able to run this linter locally.
- `e.g.` prefixes on placeholders are removed because the linter had a
false-positive on `placeholder="e.g. cn=Search"` for the `attr=value`
syntax and it's not ideal anyways to write `e.g.` into a placeholder
because a placeholder is meant to hold a sample value.
- In `templates/repo/settings/options.tmpl` I simplified the logic to
not conditionally create opening tags without closing tags because this
stuff confuses the linter (and possibly the reader as well).
Clarify the "link-action" behavior:
> // A "link-action" can post AJAX request to its "data-url"
> // Then the browser is redirect to: the "redirect" in response, or
"data-redirect" attribute, or current URL by reloading.
And enhance the "link-action" to support showing a modal dialog for
confirm. A similar general approach could also help PRs like
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/22344#discussion_r1062883436
> // If the "link-action" has "data-modal-confirm(-html)" attribute, a
confirm modal dialog will be shown before taking action.
And a lot of duplicate code can be removed now. A good framework design
can help to avoid code copying&pasting.
---------
Co-authored-by: silverwind <me@silverwind.io>
## Changes
- Fixes the case where a logged in user can accept an email invitation
even if their email address does not match the address in the invitation
