Conversation
|
👋 Hi! Thank you for this contribution! Just to let you know, our GitHub SDK team does a round of issue and PR reviews twice a week, every Monday and Friday! We have a process in place for prioritizing and responding to your input. Because you are a part of this community please feel free to comment, add to, or pick up any issues/PRs that are labeled with |
398e509 to
a395aaa
Compare
a395aaa to
8d9badb
Compare
8d9badb to
311f515
Compare
311f515 to
ef353c4
Compare
ef353c4 to
b1c31a3
Compare
b1c31a3 to
17793c8
Compare
17793c8 to
97249a1
Compare
| # pull_request_target: | ||
| pull_request: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| # pull_request_target: | |
| pull_request: | |
| pull_request_target: |
This needs changing before we merge, but it needs to be pull_request to run the tests in the PR before the code is merged.
deiga
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you feel so inclined, you could refactor the Check blocks you modified into ConfigStateChecks.
Otherwise LGTM
austenstone
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Left one inline note on the pull_request_target scaffold recommending its removal, since it nudges future edits toward a privileged trigger that would be easy to misuse in a secrets-bearing acceptance-test workflow.
|
Taking a step back — the goal here is great. External contributors need to be able to run acceptance tests without maintainers doing it manually. But I think we're building a lot of custom machinery (fork detection, label gates, secret validation, untrusted environments) to solve a problem GitHub already solves natively. Environment protection rules with required reviewers replace almost all of this:
That last point is critical. The label-based approach has a gap where an attacker can push new commits after the It also eliminates the interaction risk with things like AI-powered labelers (#3272) — if an automated tool accidentally applies The simplified workflow would look something like: on:
pull_request:
push:
branches: [main, release-v*]
jobs:
test:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
environment: acctest-dotcom # required reviewer gate handles everything
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: actions/setup-go@v5
- run: go test ./github -v -count=1 -parallel=20 -timeout=30m
env:
TF_ACC: "1"
GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GH_TEST_TOKEN }}
# ... other test varsThe entire |
|
I quickly looked into some of the test failures:
|
97249a1 to
6daf995
Compare
6daf995 to
d7f6257
Compare
Signed-off-by: Steve Hipwell <steve.hipwell@gmail.com>
d7f6257 to
0bf9063
Compare
Resolves #ISSUE_NUMBER
Before the change?
app_authblockAfter the change?
acctestlabel (they currently need to be approved)mainPull request checklist
Does this introduce a breaking change?
Please see our docs on breaking changes to help!