[Proposal] Move "change repo name" to danger zone #11040

New Issue

2025-11-02T09:25:51-06:00

GiteaMirror commented

2025-11-02 09:25:51 -06:00

Originally created by @b1ek on GitHub (Jun 16, 2023).

Feature Description

I think it could possibly break some stuff like ci/cd or scripts and its pretty easy to mess up with tab navigation.

I don't think its very hard to implement, but I'm happy to open a PR if necessary.

What it looks like now:

Originally created by @b1ek on GitHub (Jun 16, 2023). ### Feature Description I think it could possibly break some stuff like ci/cd or scripts and its pretty easy to mess up with tab navigation. I don't think its very hard to implement, but I'm happy to open a PR if necessary. What it looks like now: ![](https://i.imgur.com/wQmsAro.png)

GiteaMirror added the type/proposal type/feature labels 2025-11-02 09:25:51 -06:00

GiteaMirror commented

2025-11-02 09:25:51 -06:00

@silverwind commented on GitHub (Jun 16, 2023):

Isn't there already a warning after trying such a rename? FWIW, GitHub also does not have this in the danger zone and from a UX perspective, having repo name first in the options is what I would expect.

@silverwind commented on GitHub (Jun 16, 2023): Isn't there already a warning after trying such a rename? FWIW, GitHub also does not have this in the danger zone and from a UX perspective, having repo name first in the options is what I would expect.

GiteaMirror commented

2025-11-02 09:25:52 -06:00

@b1ek commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2023):

Isn't there already a warning after trying such a rename? FWIW, GitHub also does not have this in the danger zone and from a UX perspective, having repo name first in the options is what I would expect.

No there isn't, at least not at 1.20rc+0. Perhaps it would be better in terms of UI, and github does not have it in danger zone, yet it is quite a dangerous action and should be treated like one

@b1ek commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2023): > Isn't there already a warning after trying such a rename? FWIW, GitHub also does not have this in the danger zone and from a UX perspective, having repo name first in the options is what I would expect. No there isn't, at least not at 1.20rc+0. Perhaps it would be better in terms of UI, and github does not have it in danger zone, yet it is quite a dangerous action and should be treated like one

GiteaMirror commented

2025-11-02 09:25:52 -06:00

@stuzer05 commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2023):

Isn't there already a warning after trying such a rename? FWIW, GitHub also does not have this in the danger zone and from a UX perspective, having repo name first in the options is what I would expect.

No there isn't, at least not at 1.20rc+0. Perhaps it would be better in terms of UI, and github does not have it in danger zone, yet it is quite a dangerous action and should be treated like one

Why is it dangerous? Gitea automatically creates a redirect to your new repo so old name would work

@stuzer05 commented on GitHub (Jun 17, 2023): > > Isn't there already a warning after trying such a rename? FWIW, GitHub also does not have this in the danger zone and from a UX perspective, having repo name first in the options is what I would expect. > > No there isn't, at least not at 1.20rc+0. Perhaps it would be better in terms of UI, and github does not have it in danger zone, yet it is quite a dangerous action and should be treated like one Why is it dangerous? Gitea automatically creates a redirect to your new repo so old name would work

GiteaMirror commented

2025-11-02 09:25:52 -06:00

@silverwind commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2023):

git clients by default only follow redirects on initial checkout, but I recommend to configure git to http.followRedirects=true, in which case such renames are usually fine as far as git and web users are concerned.

The only other risk I see is with dumb third-party integrations that can't follow redirects, so a small "info" message might still be good to have.

@silverwind commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2023): git clients by default only [follow redirects](https://git-scm.com/docs/git-config/2.15.4#Documentation/git-config.txt-httpfollowRedirects) on initial checkout, but I recommend to configure git to `http.followRedirects=true`, in which case such renames are usually fine as far as git and web users are concerned. The only other risk I see is with dumb third-party integrations that can't follow redirects, so a small "info" message might still be good to have.

Sign in to join this conversation.

Branches Tags

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/gitea#11040