The install script read /app/gitea/public/assets/css/theme-gitea-light.css out
of the container. The official image compiles its static assets into the gitea
binary, so that path does not exist and the script could never have worked —
it would have failed on its own "could not read Gitea's own theme" check,
which at least pointed somewhere, but at the wrong thing entirely.
Fetching the file from the running server instead works whether the assets are
embedded or on disk, and has the better property besides: what the server
serves is by definition the version that is running, which is the whole reason
the base is not kept in this repository.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NizVpJ2dwzCbjCrTLCjeHn
Two halves of the same complaint: the journey into the members area does not
feel like one platform.
Members sign in to /comunidad/ through Gitea, so Gitea's sign-in form and
authorize dialog are part of everyone's journey, not just of anyone who opens a
repository. That is what the earlier "is Gitea only for admins?" question got
wrong. Unthemed they are two dark screens in the middle of a cream site.
Unlike Decap, Gitea supports being themed, so this needs no forking and nothing
a release can silently undo. The repository holds only the colour overrides;
scripts/gitea-theme.sh concatenates them onto the light theme it reads out of
the running container. Keeping somebody else's stylesheet in here would go
stale and turn every Gitea upgrade into a merge — the script is re-run instead,
which is one line in the upgrade notes. Getting a variable name wrong leaves a
corner grey rather than breaking a page, which is the failure mode worth having
when the names belong to someone else's project.
The logo is the site's wordmark, as live text in the same font stack rather than
traced to paths: the site loads no webfont at all, deliberately, so visitors
already see it in whatever sans-serif their machine substitutes. Paths would
render a Montserrat most people never see on the site itself.
Salir was the sharper problem. It cleared this session and the stored token, and
then said "Sesión cerrada" — while the Gitea session in the same browser stayed
open and Gitea still remembered the authorisation, so one click signed the next
person straight back in with no password. On a laptop shared around an
association, that button was lying.
It cannot be fixed from here. Gitea's logout has been POST-only since 1.11.2, so
a link cannot trigger it and a cross-site POST needs a CSRF token this app does
not have; prompt=login is undocumented in every released version of Gitea's
OAuth2 provider, and a security control should not rest on that. So the logout
page now says exactly what is closed and what is not, and links to the one place
that finishes it. Being honest about a limit beats a reassuring message that is
false.
Verified: 101 checks, two of them new — logout warns rather than redirecting,
and leaves no token the server could still act with. The theme itself is
visual and has to be looked at; docs/server-setup.md §12 says where.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NizVpJ2dwzCbjCrTLCjeHn
