Visibility lifecycle fixes #746
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…m-provider-github into test/pull/680
- removes testing of `internal` repositories - we encountered 500s from the API with the following error message: > Only organizations associated with an enterprise can set visibility to internal - a compatible testing environment is needed for automated testing - manual testing may be successful when running a local github instance - removes conflicting use of `private` and `visibility` - added `calculateVisibility` to account for the different combinations of visibility-related configuration that the provider expects - testing revealed different behaviour from the API documentation: > The visibility parameter overrides the private parameter when you use both parameters with the nebula-preview preview header.
- removes testing of `internal` repositories - we encountered 500s from the API with the following error message: > Only organizations associated with an enterprise can set visibility to internal - a compatible testing environment is needed for automated testing - manual testing may be successful when running a local github instance - removes conflicting use of `private` and `visibility` - added `calculateVisibility` to account for the different combinations of visibility-related configuration that the provider expects - testing revealed different behaviour from the API documentation: > The visibility parameter overrides the private parameter when you use both parameters with the nebula-preview preview header.
|
@jcudit I think this satisfies all of the conditions we talked about earlier this week. What else would you like to see on this PR? I'd be happy to update it with any additional test cases or behavior that you'd like. |
jcudit
reviewed
Apr 6, 2021
examples/repo_org_internal/cli.cfg
Outdated
Comment on lines
1
to
9
| provider_installation { | ||
| filesystem_mirror { | ||
| path = "/Users/jurgen.weber/checkouts/terraform/terraform-provider-github/examples/repo_org_internal/terraform.d/plugins" | ||
| include = ["*/*/*"] | ||
| } | ||
| direct { | ||
| exclude = ["*/*/*"] | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| provider_installation { | |
| filesystem_mirror { | |
| path = "/Users/jurgen.weber/checkouts/terraform/terraform-provider-github/examples/repo_org_internal/terraform.d/plugins" | |
| include = ["*/*/*"] | |
| } | |
| direct { | |
| exclude = ["*/*/*"] | |
| } | |
| } | |
| See Building The Provider instructions in CONTRIBUTING.md |
Can we make this more general by pointing to docs in the repo?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Definitely! Would you prefer that we keep this cli.cfg file the pointer to the repo docs, or maybe should we add a link to the README in that directory? It feels a little weird to me to keep the .cfg extension for a text or markdown file...what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
add a link to the README in that directory
Good catch! My vote goes to adding a link. https://github.com/integrations/terraform-provider-github/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#building-the-provider addresses this indirectly, so maybe we could link to there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done! I've removed the config and provided the link here, and I've also renamed the example directory and created repo name to match the existing pattern in this commit.
How does that look?
jcudit
approved these changes
Apr 9, 2021
jcudit
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 16, 2021
kfcampbell
added a commit
to kfcampbell/terraform-provider-github
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2022
* visibility is required on create and can not be updated * add an example * update logic for testing if there is an adequate change * add visibility tests * add testing for creation of private-visibility repos - removes testing of `internal` repositories - we encountered 500s from the API with the following error message: > Only organizations associated with an enterprise can set visibility to internal - a compatible testing environment is needed for automated testing - manual testing may be successful when running a local github instance - removes conflicting use of `private` and `visibility` - added `calculateVisibility` to account for the different combinations of visibility-related configuration that the provider expects - testing revealed different behaviour from the API documentation: > The visibility parameter overrides the private parameter when you use both parameters with the nebula-preview preview header. * add testing for creation of private-visibility repos - removes testing of `internal` repositories - we encountered 500s from the API with the following error message: > Only organizations associated with an enterprise can set visibility to internal - a compatible testing environment is needed for automated testing - manual testing may be successful when running a local github instance - removes conflicting use of `private` and `visibility` - added `calculateVisibility` to account for the different combinations of visibility-related configuration that the provider expects - testing revealed different behaviour from the API documentation: > The visibility parameter overrides the private parameter when you use both parameters with the nebula-preview preview header. * Uncomment tests * Remove specific configuration and instead link to Building the Provider documentation * Renamed example directory to match existing pattern Co-authored-by: Jurgen Weber <jurgen@space-marine.org> Co-authored-by: Jeremy Udit <jcudit@github.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR unifies the work done in jurgenweber's PR#680 as well as this test branch that some folks were working on.