Rework pipeline messages

[qwerty287]

supersedes #3421
closes #2971
closes #4677

Currently, our pipeline model has fields like the message, title etc., but every field is used differently, dependending on the event.

This PR changes this and splits these reused fields to have a more clear pipeline model.

The model now has fields like:

• commit (containing sha, author, forge url and message)
• pull request (index, title, from fork, labels)
• release title

and similar.

Advantages:

1. cleaner model and less differently used fields
2. fix the problem that there is a difference between commit and pipeline author (pipeline author = pusher) Environment Variable CI_COMMIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL is wrong #2971
3. store and show the commit message for every pipeline
4. store and show the context of a pipeline (PR title, deployment target, release title etc.) and show it

Especially 3 and 4 and are the enhancement parts here, as we can now store both context and commit message and not only one.

new UI for a PR:

TODO

• verify/fix forge event urls
• testing
• docs
• update ui to show context (Two row layout for title and context of pipeline list #4625)

[pat-s]

@qwerty287 Why is that breaking? Because of the env var change?

[qwerty287]

Yes, env var change and it also changes the json for the pipeline model

[woodpecker-bot]

Deployment of preview was successful: https://woodpecker-ci-woodpecker-pr-4626.surge.sh

[qwerty287]

@woodpecker-ci/maintainers somebody has an idea how to fix the DB tests? https://ci.woodpecker-ci.org/repos/3780/pipeline/24869/38

Besides that, this PR can get first reviews. It still needs testing and the UI is probably not the best.

Also, there are some todos, especially in the bitbucket code. Maybe @langecode you can check this out?

[xoxys]

Can you add a bit more context about what has changed and how it fixes the linked issue? IMO it helps to provide a more detailed PR description in addition to the code.

[qwerty287]

@xoxys updated the description

[xoxys]

Thank you! ❤️

[xoxys]

Will finally take a look this evening.

[xoxys]

I would stick to a two line layout, even if the second line would be empty. The pipeline id is not show for me.

[qwerty287]

I would stick to a two line layout, even if the second line would be empty.

I'm not sure if I'd do this.

This looks kinda weird.

The pipeline id is not show for me.

This is very weird, as it seems to be a problem in the migration. However, I couldn't find the bug in the code, everything seems correct…

[xoxys]

I'm not sure if I'd do this.

True. But I would prefer to not change the layout depending on the event. Ill try to find another approach if not Im also fine with the current way.