[MAINT] Fix github_organization_ruleset and github_repository_ruleset with push target#2958
Conversation
stevehipwell
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this change likely wants to wait for the SDK upgrade as a lot of this area is modified in future versions.
FYI the error behaviours previously seen should have been mitigated by #2705 so if there is an error the provider should handle it gracefully.
0531db8 to
9dd2965
Compare
1bdfa45 to
efd67ae
Compare
github_organization_ruleset with push targetgithub_organization_ruleset with push target
52d95d4 to
6782aab
Compare
stevehipwell
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it be possible to either de-scope this PR or open a new PR with the smallest number of changes possible to fix the outstanding bugs?
|
@stevehipwell Yes, I agree. I've done that already in this PR: #2976 But I can't switch the base of this PR to point to that :) |
github_organization_ruleset with push targetgithub_organization_ruleset and github_repository_ruleset with push target
1fe74fc to
2a2277a
Compare
stevehipwell
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added some review comments, mainly about the code structure.
c1019c3 to
d51fea0
Compare
5c0112b to
c8d93e0
Compare
stevehipwell
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@deiga I've added some comments but the main concern here is that we keep only the relevant changes in the PR. If you could tidy the PR up, rebase, and then I'll give this a full PR with the aim of getting it merged ASAP.
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
…anything Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
…thing Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
…o ruleset Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
Signed-off-by: Timo Sand <timo.sand@f-secure.com>
6da201a to
00afcdb
Compare
Resolves #2929, #2467
Before the change?
ref_namewould cause the provider to Panic asref_nameis a required fieldruleswhich weren't valid forpushrulesetsAfter the change?
pushrulesets to an organizationref_nameshould no longer be needed to be set forpushtargetconditions&targetvalidation logic should ensure correct fields are populatedPull request checklist
Schema migrations have been created if needed (example)Does this introduce a breaking change?
Please see our docs on breaking changes to help!