Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

gitea: 1.11.6 -> 1.12.0 #91069

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 21, 2020
Merged

gitea: 1.11.6 -> 1.12.0 #91069

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 21, 2020

Conversation

Ma27
Copy link
Member

@Ma27 Ma27 commented Jun 18, 2020

Motivation for this change

https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/releases/tag/v1.12.0

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@flokli flokli requested a review from kolaente June 18, 2020 22:30
@flokli
Copy link
Contributor

flokli commented Jun 18, 2020

https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/releases/tag/v1.12.0 mentions "Security", and contains some code backported somewhere - so should we add a backport for stable as well?

@FRidh
Copy link
Member

FRidh commented Jun 19, 2020

"Security fix" is for "It is impossible to use -1 to disable algo for minimum key size check.".

@flokli
Copy link
Contributor

flokli commented Jun 19, 2020 via email

@kolaente
Copy link
Member

Oh wow, why would I want to disable the minimum key size check? oO.

@flokli You would not disable the key size check but the algorithm, see go-gitea/gitea#11417 (comment) and https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/master/custom/conf/app.example.ini#L356-L361

So if you'd want to disable the use of say rsa keys, you would put an entry like this in the config: RSA = -1. The fix in the release fixes that because it was not working.

v1.11.7 has also been released, we should probably put that in stable instead. Though now with 1.12.0 release that's not getting updates for a long time.

@Ma27 Ma27 marked this pull request as ready for review June 19, 2020 17:55
@Ma27
Copy link
Member Author

Ma27 commented Jun 19, 2020

Just deployed this to my personal instance and it works fine. If everyone else agrees, I'd update gitea on stable to 1.11.7.

@flokli
Copy link
Contributor

flokli commented Jun 19, 2020

@Ma27 SGTM.

@Ma27 Ma27 requested a review from aanderse June 21, 2020 22:06
Copy link
Member

@aanderse aanderse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @Ma27! Enough approvals to merge 👍

@aanderse aanderse merged commit d9e94d1 into NixOS:master Jun 21, 2020
@Ma27 Ma27 deleted the bump-gitea branch June 21, 2020 23:17
@Ma27
Copy link
Member Author

Ma27 commented Jun 21, 2020

Thanks! Will update gitea on release-20.03 to 1.11.8 tomorrow :)

@Ma27
Copy link
Member Author

Ma27 commented Jun 21, 2020

Oh and https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/releases/tag/v1.12.1 is out as well now

Ma27 added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 22, 2020
Rationale for update: on `master`, `gitea` has been updated to `1.12.0`
in #91069 which contains a few breaking changes. The latest
1.11-releases contain a few bugfixes backported from 1.12.

https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/releases/tag/v1.11.7
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/releases/tag/v1.11.8
@Ma27
Copy link
Member Author

Ma27 commented Jun 22, 2020

Updated on stable to 1.11.8: 9c42eb7
Updated on master to 1.12.1: 14bc250

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants