Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Misleading section "Example: Using an action inside a different private repository than the workflow" in "Workflow Syntax" #34562

Open
1 task done
cfstras opened this issue Sep 11, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
actions This issue or pull request should be reviewed by the docs actions team content This issue or pull request belongs to the Docs Content team needs SME This proposal needs review from a subject matter expert waiting for review Issue/PR is waiting for a writer's review

Comments

@cfstras
Copy link

cfstras commented Sep 11, 2024

Code of Conduct

What article on docs.github.com is affected?

https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#example-using-an-action-inside-a-different-private-repository-than-the-workflow

What part(s) of the article would you like to see updated?

The current example explains you must checkout the private repository and reference the action locally, which also necessitates setting up private access tokens as secrets.

However, after following Allowing access to components in an internal repository, the regular uses: {owner}/{repo}/{path}@{ref} seems to work just fine.
This is misleading and should be added as an example, or explained why this easier approach should not be used.

Additional information

No response

@cfstras cfstras added the content This issue or pull request belongs to the Docs Content team label Sep 11, 2024
Copy link

welcome bot commented Sep 11, 2024

Thanks for opening this issue. A GitHub docs team member should be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, please check out the contributing guidelines.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the triage Do not begin working on this issue until triaged by the team label Sep 11, 2024
@nguyenalex836 nguyenalex836 added actions This issue or pull request should be reviewed by the docs actions team waiting for review Issue/PR is waiting for a writer's review and removed triage Do not begin working on this issue until triaged by the team labels Sep 11, 2024
@nguyenalex836
Copy link
Contributor

@cfstras Thank you for raising this issue! I'll get this triaged for review ✨ Our team will provide feedback regarding the best next steps for this issue - thanks for your patience! 💛

@subatoi subatoi added the needs SME This proposal needs review from a subject matter expert label Sep 17, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for opening an issue! We've triaged this issue for technical review by a subject matter expert 👀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
actions This issue or pull request should be reviewed by the docs actions team content This issue or pull request belongs to the Docs Content team needs SME This proposal needs review from a subject matter expert waiting for review Issue/PR is waiting for a writer's review
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants