Currently authentication methods return information in two forms: they return who was authenticated as a `*user_model.User`, and then they insert key-values into `ctx.Data` which has critical impact on how the authenticated request is treated. This PR changes the authentication methods to return structured data in the form of an `AuthenticationResult`, with all the key-value information in `ctx.Data` being moved into methods on the `AuthenticationResult` interface. Authentication workflows in Forgejo are a real mess. This is the first step in trying to clean it up and make the code predictable and reasonable, and is both follow-up work that was identified from the repo-specific access tokens (where the `"ApiTokenReducer"` key-value was added), and is pre-requisite work to future JWT enhancements that are [being discussed](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/3571#issuecomment-13268004). ## Checklist The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. All work and communication must conform to Forgejo's [AI Agreement](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/AIAgreement.md). There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org). ### Tests for Go changes - I added test coverage for Go changes... - [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests. - [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server. - All changes, at least in theory, are refactors of existing logic and are not expected to have functional deviations -- existing regression tests are the only planned testing. - I ran... - [x] `make pr-go` before pushing ### Documentation - [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change. - [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it. ### Release notes - [ ] This change will be noticed by a Forgejo user or admin (feature, bug fix, performance, etc.). I suggest to include a release note for this change. - [x] This change is not visible to a Forgejo user or admin (refactor, dependency upgrade, etc.). I think there is no need to add a release note for this change. Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/12202 Reviewed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <aahlenst@noreply.codeberg.org> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| alpine | ||
| alt | ||
| arch | ||
| cargo | ||
| chef | ||
| composer | ||
| conan | ||
| conda | ||
| container | ||
| cran | ||
| debian | ||
| generic | ||
| goproxy | ||
| helm | ||
| helper | ||
| maven | ||
| npm | ||
| nuget | ||
| pub | ||
| pypi | ||
| rpm | ||
| rubygems | ||
| swift | ||
| vagrant | ||
| api.go | ||
| README.md | ||
Gitea Package Registry
This document gives a brief overview how the package registry is organized in code.
Structure
The package registry code is divided into multiple modules to split the functionality and make code reuse possible.
| Module | Description |
|---|---|
models/packages |
Common methods and models used by all registry types |
models/packages/<type> |
Methods used by specific registry type. There should be no need to use type specific models. |
modules/packages |
Common methods and types used by multiple registry types |
modules/packages/<type> |
Registry type specific methods and types (e.g. metadata extraction of package files) |
routers/api/packages |
Route definitions for all registry types |
routers/api/packages/<type> |
Route implementation for a specific registry type |
services/packages |
Helper methods used by registry types to handle common tasks like package creation and deletion in routers |
services/packages/<type> |
Registry type specific methods used by routers and services |
Models
Every package registry implementation uses the same underlying models:
| Model | Description |
|---|---|
Package |
The root of a package providing values fixed for every version (e.g. the package name) |
PackageVersion |
A version of a package containing metadata (e.g. the package description) |
PackageFile |
A file of a package describing its content (e.g. file name) |
PackageBlob |
The content of a file (may be shared by multiple files) |
PackageProperty |
Additional properties attached to Package, PackageVersion or PackageFile (e.g. used if metadata is needed for routing) |
The following diagram shows the relationship between the models:
Package <1---*> PackageVersion <1---*> PackageFile <*---1> PackageBlob
Adding a new package registry type
Before adding a new package registry type have a look at the existing implementation to get an impression of how it could work.
Most registry types offer endpoints to retrieve the metadata, upload and download package files.
The upload endpoint is often the heavy part because it must validate the uploaded blob, extract metadata and create the models.
The methods to validate and extract the metadata should be added in the modules/packages/<type> package.
If the upload is valid the methods in services/packages allow to store the upload and create the corresponding models.
It depends if the registry type allows multiple files per package version which method should be called:
CreatePackageAndAddFile: error if package version already existsCreatePackageOrAddFileToExisting: error if file already existsAddFileToExistingPackage: error if package version does not exist or file already exists
services/packages also contains helper methods to download a file or to remove a package version.
There are no helper methods for metadata endpoints because they are very type specific.