feat : Support repository property for GitHub organization ruleset #2356
Conversation
Moser-ss
force-pushed
the
Support-repository_property-for-github_organization_ruleset
branch
from
bb62d7a to
40c5111
Compare
Moser-ss
changed the title
|
@kfcampbell, could you take a quick look to see if I need to improve anything in this PR |
kfcampbell
left a comment
kfcampbell
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks! Have you looked at expanding the tests in github/resource_github_organization_ruleset_test.go to cover this usecase yet?
|
A test case was added, I hope the change was not to ugly |
|
@kfcampbell can I do anything to speed up the review of this PR? |
| Elem: &schema.Schema{ | ||
| Type: schema.TypeString, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this handle properties with boolean values? From a json export which shows the use of string "false" and "true" I assume it does
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I manualy tested the solution and can handle boelean custom_properties using strings
|
@Moser-ss I think you need to update the docs to reflect these changes? |
|
@stevehipwell Docs updated, thanks for catching that. |
|
@PaarthShah @kfcampbell Would you have an estimate on when this PR might be reviewed and merged? |
@wrighbr No idea, I'm not a maintainer 😅 |
|
We also need this feature. It's been stale for a little while, anything we can do to get this merged? |
|
+1 on this PR. Would be great if this can get merged soon |
|
@kfcampbell If you have a chance to review this feature it would be appreciated thanks! |
|
@kfcampbell +1, thanks! |
|
@kfcampbell would be grateful for your review here 🚀 🚀 🚀 |
|
@kfcampbell - Any chance of getting a review / approval of this PR? |
|
➕ 1️⃣ on getting this merged. Would love to migrate our bash scripts to TF, but need this functionality. |
|
+1 On desperately needing this PR to get approved :( |
|
@kfcampbell - Is there any chance we could get this merged? |
|
@tayven-bigelow check out the commit history for this repo, I don't think GitHub are providing engineering resources here at the moment. |
|
tyvm for setting up this PR, I really hope it merges in soon 🙏 |
|
hi, is there any chance to get this one merged? |
|
Hey there 👋 We're looking into getting this into a mergeable state :) This PR will need to wait until #2891 is merged as the ruleset resources in the SDK have changed. @Moser-ss Could you try rebasing and retargeting this branch to go-github-v68? |
Refactor expandConditions to reduce complexity Refactor logic to reduce the cognitive complexity and add logic to handle the repository_property field Flatten conditions for repository_property and fix schemas Add test case when ruleset use repository_property Refactor repository property conditions to make them optional Flatten update Target parameters to allow the detection of changes when remote resource is updated Update documentation
Moser-ss
force-pushed
the
Support-repository_property-for-github_organization_ruleset
branch
from
d30875f to
16c81f2
Compare
|
@deiga, I already removed the conflicts by rebasing the branch with the main branch. But do you prefer that I rebase the branch using the branch go-github-v68 |
|
@Moser-ss nice! I think, you could try it locally, to see if anything breaks or needs changes. |
17 participants
Resolves #2137
Introduces the support to use
repository_propertyto target repositories in the rulesetThe changes were manually tested against a GitHub Organization with an enterprise plan.
It is not possible to add properties with the source system because the lib version doesn't allow that. It is necessary to update to version v65
Before the change?
repository_propertyAfter the change?
repository_propertyunder the conditions blockPull request checklist
Does this introduce a breaking change?
Please see our docs on breaking changes to help!