RSS feeds for repositories owned by organizations have duplicate entries

[UpYoursMicrosoft]

Description

The RSS feeds for repositories owned by organizations have several duplicate entries with different GUIDs, cluttering feed readers and reducing the number of unique items in a feed. I originally ran into the bug on https://git.mills.io/yarnsocial/yarn.rss and did some testing in different contexts to try and find a pattern. The bug is definitely related to repositories owned by organizations, but the number of duplicates differs between repositories. The results of my tests are displayed below.

URL							Instance Version	Duplicates?	Notes
https://git.mills.io/yarnsocial/yarn.rss		1.17.0			Yes		Original finding
https://git.mills.io/yarnsocial/yarn.social.rss		1.17.0			Yes		Same organization, different repository
https://git.mills.io/saltyim/salty.im.rss		1.17.0			Yes		Same instance, different organization
https://git.mills.io/prologic/gonix.rss			1.17.0			No		Same instance, but repository owned by a user
https://try.gitea.io/0000000000/aaaa.rss		1.18.0+dev-320-g353a533	Yes		Demo instance, repo owned by an organization. 
https://try.gitea.io/UpYoursMicrosoft/foobar.rss	1.18.0+dev-320-g353a533	No		Demo instance, repo owned by a user

I had to use an existing repository owned by an organization on the demo instance because I was unable to create an organization myself.

Gitea Version

1.17.0, 353a533

Can you reproduce the bug on the Gitea demo site?

Yes

Log Gist

No response

Screenshots

No response

Git Version

No response

Operating System

No response

How are you running Gitea?

I am not the operator of git.mills.io and I don't have any details on how it's being run.

Database

No response

[UpYoursMicrosoft]

If you're reading this message, that means GitHub has unflagged my account. I created my account for this bug report, but it was flagged by GitHub and the issue was invisible to everyone else. My ticket to GitHub support seems to have gone to /dev/null, so I had my buddy @prologic open another issue with the same content. See #20986, that's the "canonical" location for this issue.

Apologies for the duplicate. Thank you for maintaining this excellent project.