Introduce ActionRunAttempt to represent each execution of a run

[Zettat123]

This PR introduces a new ActionRunAttempt model and makes Actions execution attempt-scoped.

Main Changes

• Each workflow run trigger generates a new ActionRunAttempt. The triggered jobs are then associated with this new ActionRunAttempt record.
• Each rerun now creates:
  • a new ActionRunAttempt record for the workflow run
  • a full new set of ActionRunJob records for the new ActionRunAttempt
    • For jobs that need to be rerun, the new job records are created as runnable jobs in the new attempt.
    • For jobs that do not need to be rerun, new job records are still created in the new attempt, but they reuse the result of the previous attempt instead of executing again.
• Introduce rerunPlan to manage each rerun and refactored rerun flow into a two-phase plan-based model:
  • buildRerunPlan
  • execRerunPlan
  • RerunFailedWorkflowRun and RerunFailed no longer directly derives all jobs that need to be rerun; this step is now handled by buildRerunPlan.
• Converted artifacts from run-scoped to attempt-scoped:
  • uploads are now associated with RunAttemptID
  • listing, download, and deletion resolve against the current attempt
• Added attempt-aware web Actions views:
  • the default run page shows the latest attempt (/actions/runs/{run_id})
  • previous attempt pages show jobs and artifacts for that attempt (/actions/runs/{run_id}/attempts/{attempt_num})
• New APIs:
  • /repos/{owner}/{repo}/actions/runs/{run}/attempts/{attempt}
  • /repos/{owner}/{repo}/actions/runs/{run}/attempts/{attempt}/jobs
• New configuration MAX_RERUN_ATTEMPTS
  • https://gitea.com/gitea/docs/pulls/383

Compatibility

• Existing legacy runs use LatestAttemptID = 0 and legacy jobs use RunAttemptID = 0. Therefore, these fields can be used to identify legacy runs and jobs and provide backward compatibility.
  • If a legacy run is rerun, an ActionRunAttempt with attempt=1 will be created to represent the original execution. Then a new ActionRunAttempt with attempt=2 will be created for the real rerun.
• Existing artifact records are not backfilled; legacy artifacts continue to use RunAttemptID = 0.

Improvements

• It is now easier to inspect and download logs from previous attempts.
• run_attempt semantics are now aligned with GitHub.

  • A unique number for each attempt of a particular workflow run in a repository. This number begins at 1 for the workflow run's first attempt, and increments with each re-run.

• Rerun behavior is now clearer and more explicit.
  • Instead of mutating the status of previous jobs in place, each rerun creates a new attempt with a full new set of job records.
• Artifacts produced by different reruns can now be listed separately.

Screenshots

Run with only one attempt:

Rerunning:

Latest attempt:

Previous attempt (rerun is not allowed):

Dropdown for attempt records:

[wxiaoguang]

That relative-time change was unnecessary, I reverted and converted at the call site in 1e4d241.

No, it is necessary. I don't think keeping writing new Date(attempt.triggeredAt * 1000).toISOString() is right.

If you don't want to include it here, there can be separate PR to make it accept unix timestamp (before this one)

[silverwind]

Hmm I can re-add but then it must be consistently used at all call sites, IIRC, there is more than 1.

[wxiaoguang]

We should never encourage such style code, why keep copying&pasting the redundant code? Framework can do pretty well.

[silverwind]

Fixed in 90f8f1a and made all 3 call sites use it.

[wxiaoguang]

Fixed in 90f8f1a and made all 3 call sites use it.

Number(xxx) and isNaN work pretty well. Why it needs a regexp unixSecondsRe = /^-?\d+(?:\.\d+)?$/;?

[silverwind]

Number(xxx) and isNaN work pretty well. Why it needs a regexp unixSecondsRe = /^-?\d+(?:\.\d+)?$/;?

Number has edge cases, like Number("") = 0 which would render as 1970.

[silverwind]

Tailored the implementation a bit more to backend in 515b595, only positive integers.

[wxiaoguang]

Tailored the implementation a bit more to backend in 515b595, only positive integers.

But .... why it needs to pass empty string as fallback? Backend never sends empty value for it

---

And do we have a clear definition for what "relative-time" should do for datetime=''? The tests just set "fallback" as textContent and check it again.

Not blocker, but I just found it's difficult to understand.

[silverwind]

The previous code also had the '' fallback, it was preserved as-is. Probably overly defensive.

90f8f1a#diff-2694e5409a944101daf84d16093d51b87f3cb841def732a59c1e75ad3b1c35e6L21