Codeberg/Community
54
325
Fork
You've already forked Community
12

let gitea sign merge-commits of pull-requests (install GPG-key for gitea)? #399

Closed
opened 2021年02月17日 07:38:30 +01:00 by BernieO · 1 comment

I am looking for a way to sign a merge-commit of a pull-requests.

When merging a pull-request, gitea will generate a commit itself. According to the gitea docs those commits could automatically be signed by gitea.

When a branch is proteced with status check and require signed commits enabled, a merge is impossible, because some required checks are missing.

When disabling require signed commits (status check still enabled) an administrator still may merge the pull request, but gitea clearly states that there is no key available to sign this commit.

In both cases all commits being contained in the pull-request are signed with a proper signature, that gitea trusts.

According to the gitea API the public key can be retrieved from https://codeberg.org/api/v1/signing-key. When requesting that link, Gitea returns http status code 200, but the result is an empty string.

To me, all this looks like there is no GPG key installed for Gitea at codeberg.org and thus signing merge-commits of pull-requests is just not possible on codeberg.org.

Am I something missing, or is there another way to get signed merge-commits of pull-requests?

Would it be possible to install a GPG-key for the gitea-instance at codeberg.org?

I am looking for a way to sign a merge-commit of a pull-requests. When merging a pull-request, gitea will generate a commit itself. According to [the gitea docs](https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/signing/#automatic-signing) those commits could automatically be signed by gitea. When a branch is proteced with *status check* and *require signed commits* enabled, a merge is impossible, because `some required checks are missing`. When disabling *require signed commits* (*status check* still enabled) an administrator still may merge the pull request, but gitea clearly states that `there is no key available to sign this commit`. In both cases all commits being contained in the pull-request are signed with a proper signature, that gitea trusts. According to [the gitea API](https://codeberg.org/api/v1/swagger#/miscellaneous/getSigningKey) the public key can be retrieved from https://codeberg.org/api/v1/signing-key. When requesting that link, Gitea returns http status code `200`, but the result is an empty string. To me, all this looks like there is no GPG key installed for Gitea at codeberg.org and thus signing merge-commits of pull-requests is just not possible on codeberg.org. Am I something missing, or is there another way to get signed merge-commits of pull-requests? Would it be possible to install a GPG-key for the gitea-instance at codeberg.org?
Author
Copy link

Sorry - for whatever reason this issue was filed twice.
Forget about this one.
See #400 instead

Sorry - for whatever reason this issue was filed twice. Forget about this one. See #400 instead
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
main
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels
accessibility

Reduces accessibility and is thus a "bug" for certain user groups on Codeberg.
bug

Something is not working the way it should. Does not concern outages.
bug
infrastructure

Errors evidently caused by infrastructure malfunctions or outages
Codeberg

This issue involves Codeberg's downstream modifications and settings and/or Codeberg's structures.
contributions welcome

Please join the discussion and consider contributing a PR!
docs

No bug, but an improvement to the docs or UI description will help
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists
enhancement

New feature
infrastructure

Involves changes to the server setups, use `bug/infrastructure` for infrastructure-related user errors.
legal

An issue directly involving legal compliance
licence / ToS

involving questions about the ToS, especially licencing compliance
please chill
we are volunteers

Please consider editing your posts and remember that there is a human on the other side. We get that you are frustrated, but it's harder for us to help you this way.
public relations

Things related to Codeberg's external communication
question

More information is needed
question
user support

This issue contains a clearly stated problem. However, it is not clear whether we have to fix anything on Codeberg's end, but we're helping them fix it and/or find the cause.
s/Forgejo

Related to Forgejo. Please also check Forgejo's issue tracker.
s/Forgejo/migration

Migration related issues in Forgejo
s/Pages

Issues related to the Codeberg Pages feature
s/Weblate

Issue is related to the Weblate instance at https://translate.codeberg.org
s/Woodpecker

Woodpecker CI related issue
security

involves improvements to the sites security
service

Add a new service to the Codeberg ecosystem (instead of implementing into Gitea)
upstream

An open issue or pull request to an upstream repository to fix this issue (partially or completely) exists (i.e. Gitea, Forgejo, etc.)
wontfix

Codeberg's current set of contributors are not planning to spend time on delegating this issue.
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
Codeberg/Community#399
Reference in a new issue
Codeberg/Community
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?