-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
Add enterprise actions permissions endpoints and reorg files #2920
Add enterprise actions permissions endpoints and reorg files #2920
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Glenn Lewis <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Glenn Lewis <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Glenn Lewis <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Glenn Lewis <[email protected]>
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2920 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 98.17% 95.12% -3.05%
==========================================
Files 143 146 +3
Lines 12609 13633 +1024
==========================================
+ Hits 12379 12969 +590
- Misses 156 559 +403
- Partials 74 105 +31
|
I'm not sure what approach I should take to resolve the duplicated code. It seems like both enterprise and organization versions of the permissions just swap the url of the endpoint.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just some suggestions to make it pass lint. I'll do a full review later today.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks good except for a few doc urls that need to be updated to point to enterprise-cloud.
According to our CONTRIBUTING.md: Other notes on code organizationCurrently, everything is defined in the main Code is organized in files also based pretty closely on the GitHub API and I would like to preserve this convention to the best of our ability. Although I'm trying to catch up on a large backlog, I don't want to rush this one through without thinking about it, which is going to involve looking at the official docs and trying to make sense of which API calls belong to which |
Ah, I see that I had the same challenges with #2518 as well. |
After taking the time to look at all the GitHub documentation linked in the table above, it is now clear to me that all of these endpoints should be available in the Seeing that there are two flavors of endpoints (those for
I'm fine with either, but I'm betting you might prefer Option 2. (Note that all new files should have copyright year 2023 according to the Google Open Source legal team when I was there.) I apologize for the delay, but please proceed using either option above. Thank you, @RickleAndMortimer ! |
I'll run through option 2, I'll get to updating this PR asap. Thanks for the update! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Instead of completely deleting the methods that are being moved from one service to another, can you instead please mark them as:
// Deprecated: please use `...` instead.
That way, this will not be a "Breaking API" PR.
I'm planning on just having the functions dealing with organizations as written before this PR and anything enterprise-related has it's own function, so nothing should be deprecated. |
Should I also add the deleted tests as well for the deprecated functions? seeing as they will be using the functions under the actions service I'm not sure if it is still necessary to do so |
Let's please leave them for now so that our Codecov doesn't artificially drop. Also, I'd like to figure out why it is already dropped a few percent in this PR if we could nail that down... |
Could the loss of code coverage be from my PR being 10 commits behind? Would that fix the issue or is there something I'm missing |
Hmmm... I doubt it but will investigate and get back to you... |
Disregarding the codecov issue, Is there anything else I should include with this PR? |
Thank you for your patience and persistence with this PR, @RickleAndMortimer ! As far as I can tell, this is NOT a breaking-API change, which is nice. Merging. |
I could say the same to you as well, thank you for your guidance! |
PR following #2518