5 Commits (ab54310731411c09ff41b8eb75eb6a3691768d06)

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
wxiaoguang	e6f62eea70	Do not prepare oauth2 config if it is not enabled, do not write config in some sub-commands (#25567) (#25576) ... Backport #25567 Ref: * https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/25377#issuecomment-1609757289 And some sub-commands like "generate" / "docs", they do not need to use the ini config	2 years ago
Giteabot	8302b95d6b	Avoid polluting config file when "save" (#25395) (#25406) ... Backport #25395 by @wxiaoguang That's a longstanding INI package problem: the "MustXxx" calls change the option values, and the following "Save" will save a lot of garbage options into the user's config file. Ideally we should refactor the INI package to a clear solution, but it's a huge work. A clear workaround is what this PR does: when "Save", load a clear INI instance and save it. Partially fix #25377, the "install" page needs more fine tunes. Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Giteabot	e9fab3ea3e	Avoid polluting the config (#25345) (#25354) ... Backport #25345 by @wxiaoguang Caught by #25330 Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>	2 years ago
Lunny Xiao	5cf7da63ee	Refactor config provider (#24245) ... This PR introduces more abstract about `ConfigProvider` and hides more `ini` references. --------- Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>	2 years ago
Lunny Xiao	c53ad052d8	Refactor the setting to make unit test easier (#22405) ... Some bugs caused by less unit tests in fundamental packages. This PR refactor `setting` package so that create a unit test will be easier than before. - All `LoadFromXXX` files has been splited as two functions, one is `InitProviderFromXXX` and `LoadCommonSettings`. The first functions will only include the code to create or new a ini file. The second function will load common settings. - It also renames all functions in setting from `newXXXService` to `loadXXXSetting` or `loadXXXFrom` to make the function name less confusing. - Move `XORMLog` to `SQLLog` because it's a better name for that. Maybe we should finally move these `loadXXXSetting` into the `XXXInit` function? Any idea? --------- Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de> Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>	2 years ago