-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
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
Update reserved usernames list #18438
Conversation
Gusted
commented
Jan 28, 2022
- Adding additional usernames which are already routes, it's safe to add them as any existing users should already have been "broken"(shouldn't be able to access profile etc.)
- Adding additional usernames which are already routes, it's safe to add them as any existing users should already have been "broken"(shouldn't be able to access profile etc.)
It's better to use the char |
Why (I mean the old code, since we are improving the code, maybe we could improve the legacy together) |
Was introduced in #15834 #15834 (comment) |
I can not get the point why should we keep it in the latest code base, maybe it's time to remove it? And |
🤷🏽♀️ I'm not sure, better to leave it in then or silverwind gives the green light. |
|
What about using the char For example: |
Or |
Yep, |
So the removal of those "futured reserved names" is good? |
After we have an agreement of |
From my experience, if we say about "agreement", most people just keep silence, a few people just disagree for no reason explained, then many useful ideas cannot be made to an agreement. |
Well, what about documenting a similar idea/process as Go has? https://github.com/golang/proposal#the-proposal-process whereby it's a "simple" agreed if nobody has a objection to it. Such that certain changes can be discussed and actually being worked on instead of being stalled because nobody wants to speak up. |
Most communities have similar processes. besides Golang, there are Python PEP https://www.python.org/dev/peps/#meta-peps-peps-about-peps-or-processes , PHP RFC https://wiki.php.net/rfc , etc. If Gitea can have such documents, it would help, however, such documents need an agreement again. I hope we can get right things done and move on. |
For the Docker/Open Container api I will need |
not even /api/v2? |
The last time I checked this I did not find a way. Here is the Gitlab change for example: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/10422 But I will test it again tomorrow. |
Tested it again. The official Docker server has support for a different endpoint but the Docker CLI does not support it. Compose file: version: '3'
services:
docker-registry:
image: registry:2
environment:
- REGISTRY_HTTP_PREFIX=/test/sub/ Opening docker tag ubuntu:latest <domain>/test/sub/ubuntu:latest
docker push <domain>/test/sub/ubuntu:latest results in
The CLI does not know about the prefix and prepends the References: |
So we need to add |
Regarding "-", I think it's fine for all technical routes (like assets, avatars etc), but for everything visible to the end user, I personally prefer fancy URLs (/user, /settings, /admin etc). They are more intuitive to type and share (I often type URLs myself, and would probably forget about the dash easily). |
The |
OK. Some instances may want to customize their reserved names list. So we may could also add a new list in ini configuration. |
Should that be added within this PR? Seems like a good idea. |
A standalone PR maybe reviewed faster. |
* giteaofficial/main: Update reserved usernames list (go-gitea#18438) Configure OpenSSH log level via Environment in Docker (go-gitea#19274) Use a more general (and faster) method to sanitize URLs with credentials (go-gitea#19239) [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin fix link to package registry docs (go-gitea#19268) Add Redis Sentinel Authentication Support (go-gitea#19213)