Refactor routers directory

[lunny]

This PR creates routers/web, routers/install, routers/private , routers/api for different routers.

• routers/web includes all web ui requests except api requests from the web ui
• routers/install includes all install routers
• routers/private include all internal routers
• routers/api include all restful API v1 routers

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #15800 (b75a005) into main (e03a91a) will decrease coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 46.51%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15800      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   44.17%   44.14%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         684      693       +9     
  Lines       82289    82286       -3     
==========================================
- Hits        36354    36323      -31     
- Misses      40046    40074      +28     
  Partials     5889     5889              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
cmd/web.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
routers/api/v1/repo/file.go	62.50% <0.00%> (ø)
routers/install/install.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
routers/install/routes.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
routers/install/setting.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
routers/web/admin/admin.go	11.37% <ø> (ø)
routers/web/admin/auths.go	35.16% <ø> (ø)
routers/web/admin/emails.go	0.00% <ø> (ø)
routers/web/admin/hooks.go	0.00% <ø> (ø)
routers/web/admin/notice.go	0.00% <ø> (ø)
... and 105 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e03a91a...b75a005. Read the comment docs.

[6543]

@lunny you removed my changes on rebase :/

[zeripath]

Not really liking this name... I think there's some slight inconsistency with the naming of functions in this package.

[lunny]

The name was changed from ExploreCode to Codes which like ExploreRepos to Repos.

[zeripath]

I guess Code is already a plural - so I think the s is triggering me. Would be happier if you dropped the s I think.

Suggested change

	func Codes(ctx *context.Context) {
	func Code(ctx *context.Context) {

---

But I think there is still a structural issue with the names of page renderers and their sub components here (and elsewhere).

Within this package there are the Render* functions which admittedly have a different signature but everything else in this package is also rendering. So I'm not sure that they need the Render prefix, but I do see the point of having some distinct way of labelling things as incomplete pages. Maybe these should be suffixed Component as they're not full pages. e.g. UserSearchComponent (or moved out of the explore package so the only things it exports are actually full pages.)

If we went for the suffix approach, that would then mean that the full page renderers here & elsewhere should really gain a Page suffix - e.g. CodePage, UsersPage, OrganizationsPage and so on. However, I appreciate that that would make the web routes function a bit wordy - so maybe cleaning up the routers packages so that only full page rendering functions are ever exported from them with subpage components elsewhere might be a better idea.

With better and clearer labelling of full page rendering functions etc we'll be better placed to actually start documenting the renderers as to which paths it's expected to fire on, it's permissions, etc. and maybe even move to make routes functions be generated.

[lunny]

I will rename it to Code but not with Page suffix, otherwise all route functions will be added Page. It's awful.

[zeripath]

It's not great and I understand the reluctance - however there is a genuine issue here. Here are a couple of examples the problem that adding Page suffices or cleaning up the packages would help with:

in routers/repo/attachment.go:94 there is a func called GetAttachment(ctx context.Context) is this a page renderer? user.GetUserParams isn't a renderer. Turns out that it is a renderer.

RefBlame in routers/repo/blame.go is a page renderer, as is RefCommits in routers/repo/commits.go, Commits in that file is not a direct page renderer though nor are the RepoRefByType functions.

Would you guess that InitializeLabels is actually a page renderer but that RetrieveLabels is not?

From looking at a signature and name of a function you can't tell what it's supposed to be doing - and the comments aren't much better.

[6543]

should we make the diff even more complex?

I think it's a valid issue but does it meet the scope of this pull?