Repository navigation
docs(ci): explain the token, not the incident, in the gh api comment - #154
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Jaro-c <75870284+Jaro-c@users.noreply.github.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The problem
schedule-freshness.ymljustifies itsgh apicall by describing an enforcement action againstthe organisation account:
This repository is public, and my documentation standard keeps internal operations detail out of
anything a third party reads. It also does not help the reader it was written for: someone
auditing this file needs to know the call is correct because it runs as a job-scoped token. Why
I hold a rule about my own credentials is a different fact and not theirs to need.
This is the source copy. I found it while cleaning the same text out of
apt,homebrew-tapand
scoop-bucket, which took it from here when they copied the reusables in.poduphas ittoo and is fixed separately. Every repository that copies a reusable out of here from now on
would inherit it, so this is the copy that stops the spread.
What I changed
The comment only. No
run:line,env:,permissions:block, input or trigger is touched, andthe replacement says the same thing in the terms a consumer actually needs.
The tag question, which I am not deciding here
This changes the bytes of a reusable's surface without changing its behaviour. The rule in
standards/ciis that a semver tag marks a behaviour change for consumers rather than the factthat something shipped, so on that reading this does not earn one. It does mean
pin-policywill see a byte difference for anyone pinned here.
The blast radius is one repository: I checked every repo in the org and
authcoreis the onlyone still referencing
schedule-freshnessremotely. The three distribution channels andpodupcarry their own copies now.
What I checked
No occurrence of "suspend", "banned", "ban" or "this machine" is left in the file, and it still
parses as YAML.
Signed-off-by: Jaro-c 75870284+Jaro-c@users.noreply.github.com