UX treat register like sign in, even oauth #5033
Conversation
coolaj86
force-pushed
the
ux-register-is-signin
branch
from
8178780 to
2bdc146
Compare
coolaj86
changed the title
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5033 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 41.15% 41.17% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 464 464
Lines 62763 62757 -6
==========================================
+ Hits 25833 25841 +8
+ Misses 33537 33521 -16
- Partials 3393 3395 +2
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
bkcsoft
added
the
lgtm/need 2
|
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs during the next 2 months. Thank you for your contributions. |
ryanburnette
force-pushed
the
ux-register-is-signin
branch
from
2bdc146 to
c003070
Compare
|
Rebased on master and ready for re-review! |
|
bump |
|
|
||
| // This will link the account in such a way that it cannot be removed | ||
| // TODO why is this different from normal linking? | ||
| if setting.Service.AllowOnlyExternalRegistration { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think this is necessary. setting.Service.AllowOnlyExternalRegistration means user must register via external source. Since we have been in LinkAccountPostRegister. The check is unnecessary.
| if err := models.UpdateUserCols(u, "is_admin", "is_active", "last_login_unix"); err != nil { | ||
| ctx.ServerError("UpdateUser", err) | ||
| // This will link the account in such a way that it can be removed | ||
| if !setting.Service.AllowOnlyExternalRegistration { |
|
@solderjs could you remove |
|
@lunny I think they might actually integral to the purpose of this pr. From what I understand the purpose is about being able to remove the link of Gitea user from the external source. |
|
Whether this is the correct technique to do that is another question. I suspect we should be asking at the time of attempted removal of external links whether it's reasonable to do so. |
|
The goal is to be able to create a secure account that doesn't have a password that can be used as a backdoor to gain access. If a local account is required, it thwarts the intent. |
|
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs during the next 2 months. Thank you for your contributions. |
|
Need to resolve conflicts |
lunny
added
the
issue/confirmed
|
It's stale for long time. What's the status of this PR? |
wxiaoguang
added
issue/needs-feedback
Re: #4226, #5032,
ALLOW_ONLY_EXTERNAL_REGISTRATION = trueremember meon sign up pageIf you'd like to test it out
My pull request is against
master, but I run it as backport to v1.5.1 (includes #5006, #5029, #5033):I would not recommend replacing your existing gitea, but rather creating a symlink so that you can easily switch back if you don't like it. For example, if you keep
giteain/opt/gitea/bin:rsync -av ./gitea /opt/gitea/bin/gitea-v1.5.1-coolaj86 pushd /opt/gitea/bin mv gitea gitea-v1.5.1 ln -s gitea-v1.5.1-coolaj86 giteaI've run a couple of manual tests so far, so I feel comfortable with someone else trying it out. I won't be pushing any additional changes to that branch (such as the upcoming changes to address the empty checkboxes in the issue) until I've tested them in production for myself.