inbuxa/inbuxa-server
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 1 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
211 Commits 7 Branches 1 Tag
main
Commit Graph
6 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
jcoffey-dev 29bcfecb80 ci: add Gitea Actions workflow ported from .gitlab-ci.yml
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 24m51s
Details
2026-09-21 22:45:05 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 0fb98a6f4c Run CI on the self-hosted GitLab 
Ports .github/workflows/ci.yml after the GitHub account was suspended and
Actions stopped being reachable. Same checks, same order, with the image
pinned by digest in place of the workflow's SHA-pinned actions.

cleanup.yml is not ported: it pruned GHCR through an action, and GitLab
keeps that as a container registry cleanup policy on the project rather
than as a pipeline. publish.yml and release.yml are larger and follow
separately.

The Actions workflows stay in the tree as the reference.

.gitignore blanket-ignores dotfiles, so .gitlab-ci.yml is negated there the
same way .github already is.
 2026-09-20 20:17:24 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 92d2b07c2e record-before: ignore the bytecode cache the path import leaves 2026-09-20 00:02:06 -07:00
jcoffey-dev a63839f6b0 The repository's own .github, now that it is public 
SPEC 2.2a says INBUXA writes its own when the repository is first published,
and it is. Until now the public repository carried Stalwart's: a security
policy telling people to report vulnerabilities to Stalwart Labs, and a
contributing guide whose policy is that pull requests from anyone not on
upstream's vouched list are closed automatically. Neither is this project's,
and both were being offered to anyone who looked.

So: a security policy that says where to send a report, and what happens if
it turns out to be upstream's bug rather than ours; a contributing guide that
says what a fork of someone else's code needs from a contributor, including
the clean-room question, since the record has to stay true; the Contributor
Covenant; and a sponsor link. Upstream's two security documents move to
.github-upstream/ beside its workflows -- kept, not used, not presented as
ours.

CI builds the server and compiles every test target, and deliberately runs
no suite. The unit tests only build with the integration crate in the graph,
and the integration suites want a STORE, fixed ports and a container apiece,
so running them here would mean a tick that skipped everything or a cross
that means "the runner has no Redis". The workflow says as much, so nobody
has to rediscover it.

Also ignores /artifact: two hand-built binaries, ~190 MB, one `git add -A`
away from a public repository.
 2026-09-20 00:00:05 -07:00
jcoffey-dev a6c7152c52 cutover-rehearsal: ignore the fixture it writes 2026-09-19 22:34:50 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 7dae9b29fd Import upstream v0.16.22, stripped 
Upstream commit: 474dd0229cb20cf513036619781ed97bd8073c3f
Enterprise-only files removed or emptied: 63
Enterprise-only snippets removed: 117 in 50 files
Dangling module declarations removed: 5
Cargo edits turning enterprise off: 14
Verification: clean
Enterprise feature gates left for rebuilt features: 19 in 18 files

Produced by tools/fork/strip.py. The full report is in docs/fork/strip-reports/ on main.
 2026-09-18 10:21:56 -07:00