Allow retention_days of 0 to mean retain forever (closes #79)

RetentionDays carried gorm:"default:30", so GORM substituted 30 for a
zero value while building the insert. A webhook could therefore never
be configured to keep its events indefinitely: the reaper's
retain-forever branch existed but was unreachable from the normal
create and edit flows.

Introduce database.RetentionForeverDays = 365 * 1000 as the sentinel
for "retain forever" and a Webhook.BeforeSave hook that rewrites any
non-positive RetentionDays to it. The rewrite has to live in the hook
rather than at the call sites: GORM applies the column default while
converting the model to insert values, which happens after BeforeSave,
so anything later loses that race. Putting it on the model also means
a future call site, such as the planned REST API, cannot bypass it.

The reaper now skips a webhook when Webhook.RetainsForever reports
true, which recognises the sentinel and keeps honouring the old <= 0
values for rows written before it existed. Without this the sentinel,
being positive, would have produced a cutoff a thousand years in the
past and a DELETE matching nothing on every sweep.

Bound the finite retention range, which was previously unbounded on
the server. The reaper computes its cutoff as a time.Duration, an
int64 nanosecond count, so a day count above 106751 overflows, wraps
the span negative, and moves the cutoff into the far future — where it
matches every row and the sweep deletes every event, delivery, and
delivery result the webhook has, including ones created seconds ago.
Nothing rejected such a value: parseRetention accepted any v > 0, and
max="365" was a client-side attribute a direct POST ignored, so the
wipe was already reachable on main and removing that attribute would
have made it reachable by ordinary use.

The bound is database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays, derived from the
arithmetic itself as math.MaxInt64 / time.Hour / hoursPerDay rather
than picked as a round number, and a finite value above it is now a
400 that names the ceiling. retentionCutoff additionally clamps the
day count it is given and reports whether any cutoff applies at all,
so a row written by an older version, a migration, or a future call
site cannot reach the overflow either. A value at or above the
retain-forever sentinel stays accepted, because that is what the edit
form pre-fills for a retain-forever webhook.

Form handling is shared by create and edit through parseRetentionDays
so the two cannot drift: an empty field keeps the previous behaviour
(default on create, unchanged on edit), 0 is honoured, and an
unparseable, negative, or out-of-range value is a 400 that re-renders
the form rather than a silently substituted default. The two rejection
reasons are distinct sentinel errors so the message can name the
ceiling, and the create form now carries the submitted name and
description back into the re-rendered inputs, which the edit form
already did.

The retention inputs drop max="365". That cap was not cosmetic: the
edit form pre-fills the stored value, so a retain-forever webhook
rendered 365000 into an input capped at 365 and browser validation
would have blocked saving any edit to it. min becomes 0 with a hint
explaining what 0 does, and the list and detail views render a
RetentionLabel of "forever" instead of a raw day count.

All three Webhook methods take pointer receivers, so there is no
receiver mix and no lint suppression: BeforeSave must take a pointer
to mutate the record, and the handlers hand templates a *Webhook
because html/template cannot call a pointer method on a value held in
a map.

The 30-day default is consolidated into database.DefaultRetentionDays,
referenced from the handler and from the create form's pre-filled
value, with a test asserting it agrees with the struct tag that cannot
reference it.

README.md

@@ -321,6 +321,15 @@ days (`database.RetentionForeverDays`). The retention reaper recognises
 that sentinel and skips the webhook entirely, and the web UI displays
 such a webhook's retention as "forever" rather than as a day count.
 
+A *finite* retention is capped at `database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays`
+(106751 days, about 292 years), and a larger one is rejected with a
+400. The cap is not arbitrary: the reaper computes its cutoff as a
+`time.Duration`, an int64 nanosecond count, and a longer period
+overflows it. An overflowed cutoff lands in the future, where it
+matches every row, so the sweep would delete every event the webhook
+has instead of none. The reaper also clamps the value it is given, so a
+row written by an older version cannot trigger that either.
+
 #### Entrypoint
 
 A receiver URL where external services POST webhook events. Each

TODO.md

@@ -33,7 +33,12 @@ databases currently grow without bound.
   `Webhook.BeforeSave` hook rewriting any non-positive `retention_days`
   to it ahead of GORM's own column defaulting, a reaper that skips such
   webhooks outright, form validation that honours `0` and rejects
-  garbage with a 400, and a retention UI that says "forever"
+  garbage with a 400, and a retention UI that says "forever". Also
+  closes the overflow the same code path exposed: a finite
+  `retention_days` above `MaxFiniteRetentionDays` (106751, derived from
+  what an int64 `time.Duration` can hold) wrapped the reaper's cutoff
+  into the future and deleted every event, so it is now rejected at the
+  form and clamped in the reaper
 - 2026-08-07 Update golangci-lint to v2.12.2 (Docker image digest in
   `Dockerfile`, release-archive sha256 pins in `script/bootstrap`),
   adopt the canonical `.golangci.yml` (v2 `linters.settings` layout so

internal/database/model_webhook.go

@@ -1,7 +1,9 @@
 package database
 
 import (
+	"math"
 	"strconv"
+	"time"
 
 	"gorm.io/gorm"
 )
@@ -22,18 +24,36 @@ const (
 	// time, so a zero can never survive a round trip to the database.
 	// Nothing outside this file may hardcode the number.
 	RetentionForeverDays = 365 * 1000
+
+	// MaxFiniteRetentionDays is the largest finite retention period the
+	// reaper's cutoff arithmetic can represent, and therefore the
+	// largest one a caller may request. It is derived from that
+	// arithmetic rather than picked: retentionCutoff computes
+	// retentionDays * hoursPerDay * time.Hour, and a time.Duration is
+	// an int64 nanosecond count, so math.MaxInt64 nanoseconds divided
+	// by an hour and then by a day is the exact ceiling — 106751 days,
+	// a little over 292 years.
+	//
+	// One day more overflows int64, wraps the product negative, and
+	// turns the cutoff into a timestamp in the far future that matches
+	// every row in the webhook's database. That is why this bound is
+	// enforced on input and why retentionCutoff saturates underneath
+	// it. Note that RetentionForeverDays deliberately sits above this
+	// ceiling: such webhooks are skipped before any cutoff is
+	// computed, and never reach the arithmetic at all.
+	MaxFiniteRetentionDays = int(
+		math.MaxInt64 / int64(time.Hour) / hoursPerDay,
+	)
 )
 
 // Webhook represents a webhook processing unit that groups entrypoints and targets
 //
-// The receiver kinds below are deliberately mixed. BeforeSave has to
+// Every method below takes a pointer receiver. BeforeSave has to,
-// take a pointer because it mutates the record, and GORM only invokes
+// because it mutates the record and GORM only invokes hooks declared
-// hooks declared that way. RetainsForever and RetentionLabel have to
+// that way; the display helpers follow suit so the receiver kinds do
-// take values because html/template calls them on webhooks held in a
+// not mix. Handlers therefore put a *Webhook into template data:
-// template data map, which reflection cannot address; a pointer
+// html/template cannot call a pointer method on a value held in a map,
-// receiver there fails at render time rather than at compile time.
+// because a map element is not addressable.
-//
-//nolint:recvcheck // GORM needs a pointer hook; templates need values.
 type Webhook struct {
 	BaseModel
 
@@ -70,18 +90,29 @@ func (w *Webhook) BeforeSave(_ *gorm.DB) error {
 	return nil
 }
 
+// retainsForever reports whether a stored RetentionDays value means
+// "keep events indefinitely". It is the single definition of that
+// question, shared by Webhook.RetainsForever and by the reaper's
+// cutoff computation so the two cannot disagree about which webhooks
+// are exempt from reaping.
+//
+// It accepts the RetentionForeverDays sentinel written by BeforeSave
+// and, defensively, the non-positive values that rows written before
+// the sentinel existed may still carry.
+func retainsForever(retentionDays int) bool {
+	return retentionDays <= 0 ||
+		retentionDays >= RetentionForeverDays
+}
+
 // RetainsForever reports whether this webhook's events are kept
-// indefinitely. It accepts the RetentionForeverDays sentinel written by
+// indefinitely.
-// BeforeSave and, defensively, the non-positive values that rows
+func (w *Webhook) RetainsForever() bool {
-// written before the sentinel existed may still carry.
+	return retainsForever(w.RetentionDays)
-func (w Webhook) RetainsForever() bool {
-	return w.RetentionDays <= 0 ||
-		w.RetentionDays >= RetentionForeverDays
 }
 
 // RetentionLabel returns the webhook's retention policy as display
 // text, so that no template has to know about the sentinel value.
-func (w Webhook) RetentionLabel() string {
+func (w *Webhook) RetentionLabel() string {
 	if w.RetainsForever() {
 		return "forever"
 	}

internal/database/model_webhook_test.go

@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ import (
 	"reflect"
 	"strconv"
 	"testing"
+	"time"
 
 	"github.com/google/uuid"
 	"github.com/stretchr/testify/assert"
@@ -148,6 +149,43 @@ func TestWebhookRetentionColumnDefaultMatchesConstant(t *testing.T) {
 	)
 }
 
+// TestMaxFiniteRetentionDaysIsTheOverflowCeiling asserts that the
+// constant is exactly where the cutoff arithmetic stops working, which
+// is what makes it a derived bound rather than a round number someone
+// liked. One day more wraps the int64 nanosecond count negative, and a
+// negative span is precisely what turned a cutoff into a future
+// timestamp that matched — and deleted — every row.
+//
+// The multiplications are done through variables on purpose: as
+// constant expressions the overflowing one would not compile.
+func TestMaxFiniteRetentionDaysIsTheOverflowCeiling(t *testing.T) {
+	t.Parallel()
+
+	const hoursPerDay = 24
+
+	atCeiling := database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays
+	overCeiling := database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays + 1
+
+	assert.Positive(
+		t,
+		time.Duration(atCeiling*hoursPerDay)*time.Hour,
+		"the ceiling itself must still be representable",
+	)
+	assert.Negative(
+		t,
+		time.Duration(overCeiling*hoursPerDay)*time.Hour,
+		"one day past the ceiling must overflow",
+	)
+
+	assert.Less(
+		t,
+		database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays,
+		database.RetentionForeverDays,
+		"the sentinel sits above the ceiling and is only safe "+
+			"because retain-forever webhooks skip the arithmetic",
+	)
+}
+
 func TestWebhookRetainsForeverAndLabel(t *testing.T) {
 	t.Parallel()
 

internal/database/retention.go

@@ -177,9 +177,10 @@ func (r *RetentionReaper) reapWebhook(
 		return
 	}
 
-	cutoff := time.Now().Add(
+	cutoff, ok := retentionCutoff(time.Now(), retentionDays)
-		-time.Duration(retentionDays*hoursPerDay) * time.Hour,
+	if !ok {
-	)
+		return
+	}
 
 	deleted, err := reapExpired(db, cutoff)
 	if err != nil {
@@ -202,6 +203,37 @@ func (r *RetentionReaper) reapWebhook(
 	}
 }
 
+// retentionCutoff returns the timestamp before which a webhook's
+// events have expired, and whether any cutoff applies at all. It
+// reports false for a retain-forever policy, so no DELETE is issued.
+//
+// The day count is clamped to MaxFiniteRetentionDays first. This is
+// defense in depth rather than decoration: a time.Duration is an int64
+// nanosecond count, so an unclamped multiplication overflows above
+// that ceiling and wraps the span negative. Subtracting a negative
+// span moves the cutoff into the far future, where it matches every
+// row in the database: the sweep then deletes every event, delivery,
+// and delivery result, including ones created seconds ago. Rejecting
+// out-of-range input at the form is the primary guard; saturating here
+// means an old row, a migration, or a future call site cannot turn a
+// too-large retention into total data loss.
+func retentionCutoff(
+	now time.Time,
+	retentionDays int,
+) (time.Time, bool) {
+	if retainsForever(retentionDays) {
+		return time.Time{}, false
+	}
+
+	if retentionDays > MaxFiniteRetentionDays {
+		retentionDays = MaxFiniteRetentionDays
+	}
+
+	return now.Add(
+		-time.Duration(retentionDays*hoursPerDay) * time.Hour,
+	), true
+}
+
 // reapExpired hard-deletes, in foreign-key-safe order, the delivery
 // results, deliveries, and events associated with events older than
 // cutoff. Deletes are unscoped so rows are physically removed rather

internal/database/retention_test.go

@@ -327,6 +327,58 @@ func TestRetentionReaper_SkipsSentinelReapsFiniteInSameSweep(
 	assertChainGone(t, finiteDB, doomed)
 }
 
+// TestRetentionReaper_HugeFiniteRetentionRetainsRecentEvents pins the
+// overflow that made a large finite retention destroy everything.
+//
+// The cutoff is a time.Duration, an int64 nanosecond count. A day
+// count above MaxFiniteRetentionDays multiplied out unclamped wraps
+// negative, so subtracting it moves the cutoff into the far future,
+// where "created_at < cutoff" matches every row: an event created a
+// moment ago, and its delivery and delivery result, were all deleted
+// on the first sweep. 200000 is inside that band and below the
+// retain-forever sentinel, so it is treated as a finite policy and
+// really does reach the arithmetic.
+//
+// The row is planted at the column level because such a value can no
+// longer be submitted through the form; the point of the test is that
+// a row from an older version, or a future call site, still cannot
+// trigger the wipe.
+func TestRetentionReaper_HugeFiniteRetentionRetainsRecentEvents(
+	t *testing.T,
+) {
+	t.Parallel()
+
+	env := setupRetentionTest(t)
+
+	const overflowingRetentionDays = 200000
+
+	require.Greater(
+		t,
+		overflowingRetentionDays,
+		database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays,
+		"the test value must exceed what the cutoff can represent",
+	)
+	require.Less(
+		t,
+		overflowingRetentionDays,
+		database.RetentionForeverDays,
+		"the test value must not be rescued by the forever skip",
+	)
+
+	webhookID := createWebhook(
+		t, env.mainDB.DB(), overflowingRetentionDays,
+	)
+
+	db, err := env.mgr.GetDB(webhookID)
+	require.NoError(t, err)
+
+	fresh := seedEventChain(t, db, webhookID, time.Now())
+
+	env.reaper.ExportSweep(context.Background())
+
+	assertChainPresent(t, db, fresh)
+}
+
 func TestRetentionReaper_RetainsForeverWhenNonPositive(t *testing.T) {
 	t.Parallel()
 

internal/handlers/source_management.go

@@ -29,19 +29,47 @@ var errMissingURL = errors.New("missing URL")
 // a non-negative whole number.
 var errInvalidRetention = errors.New("invalid retention days")
 
-// retentionErrorMessage is what the create and edit forms show the user
+// errRetentionTooLarge signals a retention_days form value that is a
-// when parseRetentionDays returns errInvalidRetention.
+// whole number but larger than the reaper's cutoff arithmetic can
-const retentionErrorMessage = "Retention must be a whole number of " +
+// represent. It is distinguished from errInvalidRetention so the form
+// can tell the user the actual ceiling instead of implying their input
+// was not a number.
+var errRetentionTooLarge = errors.New("retention days out of range")
+
+// retentionErrorMessage returns the message the create and edit forms
+// show the user for a rejected retention_days value. Any error other
+// than errRetentionTooLarge falls back to the generic wording, so an
+// unrecognised parse failure still produces a sensible 400 rather than
+// an empty alert.
+func retentionErrorMessage(err error) string {
+	if errors.Is(err, errRetentionTooLarge) {
+		return "Retention must be at most " +
+			strconv.Itoa(database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays) +
 			" days, or 0 to retain events forever."
+	}
+
+	return "Retention must be a whole number of days, or 0 to " +
+		"retain events forever."
+}
 
 // parseRetentionDays interprets a retention_days form value.
 //
 // An empty value yields fallback, which lets the create path apply the
 // default and the edit path leave the stored value unchanged. A value
 // of 0 is returned as 0 and is rewritten to the retain-forever
-// sentinel by database.Webhook's BeforeSave hook, so no handler needs
+// sentinel by database.Webhook's BeforeSave hook. Anything unparseable
-// to know the sentinel. Anything unparseable or negative is an error
+// or negative is an error rather than a silently substituted default.
-// rather than a silently substituted default.
+//
+// The upper bound is not cosmetic. The reaper computes its cutoff as a
+// time.Duration, an int64 nanosecond count, so a day count above
+// database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays overflows, puts the cutoff in the
+// future, and deletes every event the webhook has. A finite value
+// above that ceiling is therefore a 400.
+//
+// A value at or above the retain-forever sentinel is not out of range:
+// it is what the edit form pre-fills for a retain-forever webhook, so
+// submitting the form back unchanged has to keep meaning "forever"
+// rather than being rejected.
 func parseRetentionDays(raw string, fallback int) (int, error) {
 	raw = strings.TrimSpace(raw)
 	if raw == "" {
@@ -53,6 +81,14 @@ func parseRetentionDays(raw string, fallback int) (int, error) {
 		return 0, errInvalidRetention
 	}
 
+	if v >= database.RetentionForeverDays {
+		return database.RetentionForeverDays, nil
+	}
+
+	if v > database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays {
+		return 0, errRetentionTooLarge
+	}
+
 	return v, nil
 }
 
@@ -138,18 +174,28 @@ func (h *Handlers) buildWebhookListItems(
 func (h *Handlers) HandleSourceCreate() http.HandlerFunc {
 	return func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
 		h.renderTemplate(
-			w, r, "sources_new.html", newSourceFormData(""),
+			w, r, "sources_new.html",
+			newSourceFormData("", "", ""),
 		)
 	}
 }
 
 // newSourceFormData builds the template data for the webhook creation
-// form, carrying the retention default so the pre-filled value comes
+// form.
-// from database.DefaultRetentionDays rather than being a third
+//
-// hardcoded copy of the same policy.
+// It carries the retention default so the pre-filled value comes from
-func newSourceFormData(errMsg string) map[string]any {
+// database.DefaultRetentionDays rather than being a third hardcoded
+// copy of the same policy, and it carries the submitted name and
+// description so that re-rendering the form after a validation failure
+// gives the user their input back instead of a blank form. The edit
+// form already behaves that way; create now matches it.
+func newSourceFormData(
+	errMsg, name, description string,
+) map[string]any {
 	return map[string]any{
 		tmplKeyError:           errMsg,
+		"Name":                 name,
+		"Description":          description,
 		"DefaultRetentionDays": database.DefaultRetentionDays,
 	}
 }
@@ -188,7 +234,9 @@ func (h *Handlers) HandleSourceCreateSubmit() http.HandlerFunc {
 			w.WriteHeader(http.StatusBadRequest)
 			h.renderTemplate(
 				w, r, "sources_new.html",
-				newSourceFormData("Name is required"),
+				newSourceFormData(
+					"Name is required", name, description,
+				),
 			)
 
 			return
@@ -201,7 +249,10 @@ func (h *Handlers) HandleSourceCreateSubmit() http.HandlerFunc {
 			w.WriteHeader(http.StatusBadRequest)
 			h.renderTemplate(
 				w, r, "sources_new.html",
-				newSourceFormData(retentionErrorMessage),
+				newSourceFormData(
+					retentionErrorMessage(retErr),
+					name, description,
+				),
 			)
 
 			return
@@ -358,8 +409,10 @@ func (h *Handlers) renderSourceDetail(
 		scheme = fwdProto
 	}
 
+	// The template calls Webhook methods, which take pointer
+	// receivers; html/template cannot address a value stored in a map.
 	data := map[string]any{
-		tmplKeyWebhook: webhook,
+		tmplKeyWebhook: &webhook,
 		"Entrypoints":  entrypoints,
 		"Targets":      targets,
 		"Events":       events,
@@ -395,7 +448,7 @@ func (h *Handlers) HandleSourceEdit() http.HandlerFunc {
 		}
 
 		data := map[string]any{
-			tmplKeyWebhook: webhook,
+			tmplKeyWebhook: &webhook,
 			tmplKeyError:   "",
 		}
 
@@ -459,7 +512,7 @@ func (h *Handlers) applyWebhookEdit(
 	name := r.FormValue("name")
 	if name == "" {
 		data := map[string]any{
-			tmplKeyWebhook: *webhook,
+			tmplKeyWebhook: webhook,
 			tmplKeyError:   "Name is required",
 		}
 
@@ -479,8 +532,8 @@ func (h *Handlers) applyWebhookEdit(
 	)
 	if retErr != nil {
 		data := map[string]any{
-			tmplKeyWebhook: *webhook,
+			tmplKeyWebhook: webhook,
-			tmplKeyError:   retentionErrorMessage,
+			tmplKeyError:   retentionErrorMessage(retErr),
 		}
 
 		w.WriteHeader(http.StatusBadRequest)
@@ -634,7 +687,7 @@ func (h *Handlers) HandleSourceLogs() http.HandlerFunc {
 		}
 
 		data := map[string]any{
-			tmplKeyWebhook: webhook,
+			tmplKeyWebhook: &webhook,
 			"Events":       evts,
 			"Page":         page,
 			"TotalPages":   totalPages,

internal/handlers/source_management_test.go

@@ -319,6 +319,102 @@ func TestHandleSourceCreateSubmit_InvalidRetentionIsRejected(
 	}
 }
 
+// TestHandleSourceCreateSubmit_OverflowingRetentionIsRejected covers
+// the data-loss path directly: a finite retention above the largest one
+// the reaper's cutoff arithmetic can represent must never reach the
+// database, because the sweep would compute a future cutoff and delete
+// every event the webhook has.
+func TestHandleSourceCreateSubmit_OverflowingRetentionIsRejected(
+	t *testing.T,
+) {
+	t.Parallel()
+
+	tooBig := strconv.Itoa(database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays + 1)
+
+	env := setupSourceTest(t)
+
+	w := submitCreate(t, env.handlers, env.cookies, "huge", &tooBig)
+
+	assert.Equal(t, http.StatusBadRequest, w.Code)
+	assert.Contains(
+		t, w.Body.String(),
+		strconv.Itoa(database.MaxFiniteRetentionDays),
+		"the form tells the user the actual ceiling",
+	)
+
+	var count int64
+
+	require.NoError(
+		t,
+		env.db.DB().Model(&database.Webhook{}).
+			Where("user_id = ?", sourceTestUserID).
+			Count(&count).Error,
+	)
+	assert.Zero(
+		t, count,
+		"no webhook may be created from a rejected form",
+	)
+}
+
+// TestHandleSourceCreateSubmit_SentinelIsAcceptedAsForever guards the
+// boundary between "too large to represent" and "retain forever": the
+// sentinel is above MaxFiniteRetentionDays, but it is the value the
+// edit form pre-fills, so it must be accepted rather than rejected as
+// out of range.
+func TestHandleSourceCreateSubmit_SentinelIsAcceptedAsForever(
+	t *testing.T,
+) {
+	t.Parallel()
+
+	env := setupSourceTest(t)
+	sentinel := strconv.Itoa(database.RetentionForeverDays)
+
+	w := submitCreate(t, env.handlers, env.cookies, "forever", &sentinel)
+	require.Equal(t, http.StatusSeeOther, w.Code)
+
+	wh := onlyWebhook(t, env.db)
+	assert.Equal(
+		t,
+		database.RetentionForeverDays,
+		storedRetentionDays(t, env.db, wh.ID),
+	)
+}
+
+// TestHandleSourceCreateSubmit_RejectedFormKeepsUserInput checks that a
+// validation failure hands the user's typing back, matching what the
+// edit form already does. Losing a long description to a mistyped
+// retention value is the kind of thing that makes people give up on a
+// form.
+func TestHandleSourceCreateSubmit_RejectedFormKeepsUserInput(
+	t *testing.T,
+) {
+	t.Parallel()
+
+	env := setupSourceTest(t)
+
+	const (
+		name        = "kept-name"
+		description = "a description worth not losing"
+	)
+
+	form := url.Values{}
+	form.Set("name", name)
+	form.Set("description", description)
+	form.Set("retention_days", "nonsense")
+
+	req := formRequest("/sources/new", env.cookies, form, nil)
+	w := httptest.NewRecorder()
+
+	env.handlers.HandleSourceCreateSubmit().ServeHTTP(w, req)
+
+	require.Equal(t, http.StatusBadRequest, w.Code)
+
+	body := w.Body.String()
+
+	assert.Contains(t, body, `value="`+name+`"`)
+	assert.Contains(t, body, description)
+}
+
 // submitEdit posts the webhook edit form for the given webhook.
 func submitEdit(
 	t *testing.T,
@@ -429,9 +525,13 @@ func TestSourceEditForm_ForeverWebhookRoundTrips(t *testing.T) {
 		t, body, `max="365"`,
 		"a max below the sentinel would block saving any edit",
 	)
+	// "Currently forever." is the rendered RetentionLabel, not the
+	// static hint below the input, which says "Enter 0 to retain events
+	// forever." A bare Contains of "forever" would pass for any
+	// webhook and would assert nothing about this one.
 	assert.Contains(
-		t, body, "forever",
+		t, body, "Currently forever.",
-		"the form explains what the sentinel means",
+		"the form reports this webhook's policy as forever",
 	)
 
 	// Submit the pre-filled value back, exactly as a browser would.

templates/sources_new.html

@@ -18,12 +18,12 @@
             <input type="hidden" name="csrf_token" value="{{.CSRFToken}}">
             <div class="form-group">
                 <label for="name" class="label">Name</label>
-                <input type="text" id="name" name="name" required autofocus placeholder="My Webhook" class="input">
+                <input type="text" id="name" name="name" value="{{.Name}}" required autofocus placeholder="My Webhook" class="input">
             </div>
 
             <div class="form-group">
                 <label for="description" class="label">Description</label>
-                <textarea id="description" name="description" rows="3" placeholder="Optional description" class="input"></textarea>
+                <textarea id="description" name="description" rows="3" placeholder="Optional description" class="input">{{.Description}}</textarea>
             </div>
 
             <div class="form-group">