tibdex/github-app-token

Not working with PR from fork

Closed this issue · 5 comments

mbrodala commented

tibdex/backport#33 recommends setting up this action job to work around the limitations of the GITHUB_TOKEN.

However, it seems like the same limitation applies to an app ID and client secret if it is injected via (organisation) secrets:

Secrets are not passed to workflows that are triggered by a pull request from a fork. Learn more.

So, how is this supposed to work exactly?

mbrodala commented

Here are 2 commits where I tried to set this up:

TYPO3-Documentation/TYPO3CMS-Reference-CoreApi@03f75bf
TYPO3-Documentation/TYPO3CMS-Reference-CoreApi@88b91e3

The current .github/workflows/backport.yml:

name: Backport
on:
  pull_request:
    types:
      - closed
      - labeled

jobs:
  backport:
    runs-on: ubuntu-18.04
    name: Backport
    steps:
      - name: Generate token
        id: generate_token
        uses: tibdex/github-app-token@v1
        with:
          app_id: ${{ secrets.BACKPORT_APP_ID }}
          private_key: ${{ secrets.BACKPORT_APP_SECRET }}
      - name: Backport
        uses: tibdex/backport@v1
        with:
          github_token: ${{ steps.generate_token.outputs.token }}

The BACKPORT_APP_ID and BACKPORT_APP_SECRET have been set in the organisation secrets.

The result: https://github.com/TYPO3-Documentation/TYPO3CMS-Reference-CoreApi/pull/1552/checks?check_run_id=3825926413

Run tibdex/github-app-token@v1
  with:
Error: Error: Input required and not supplied: app_id
jlaura commented

Same experience. APP_ID and APP_SECREt_KEY are set on the repo in the organization for me. If that helps at all.

mbrodala commented

@tibdex Exactly, that's what I wrote already. ;-)

So technically none of this is supposed to work for repositories which are updated by forks? Then this should be written clearly in https://github.com/tibdex/github-app-token and https://github.com/tibdex/backport.

tibdex commented

The issue is not intrisinc to github-app-token. If you find a way to pass the app_id and private_key without relying on secrets it will work.

  • 👎1