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

Revert "Pass the token input through on GHES" #437

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 16, 2022

Conversation

brcrista
Copy link
Contributor

Reverts #427

@thboop pointed out a bug in this: if you don't pass a token and it uses the default github.token, then pulling a new version that isn't in the tool cache will fail. The GHES github.token is not valid for calling github.com.

@brcrista brcrista requested a review from a team June 15, 2022 21:01
@brcrista brcrista mentioned this pull request Jun 15, 2022
6 tasks
Copy link
Contributor

@thboop thboop left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@brcrista brcrista merged commit cf86e08 into main Jun 16, 2022
@brcrista brcrista deleted the revert-427-brcrista/ghes-token branch June 16, 2022 15:08
brcrista added a commit to ChristopherHX/setup-python that referenced this pull request Aug 5, 2022
brcrista added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 30, 2022
* Only use github.token on github.com

This expression evaluates to `''` if called from GHES hosted elsewhere
You can still provide your token on both github.com and GHES

* Enshure blank result of expression and not false

* Revert "Revert "Pass the `token` input through on GHES (#427)" (#437)"

This reverts commit cf86e08.

* fix typo

* Add back the doc on the tool cache for self-hosted

Co-authored-by: Brian Cristante <33549821+brcrista@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants