I am trying to start a workflow only if the merged pull_request has a specific label.
The merged key is referenced here within an action. The Pull object itself is documented here. But I don't see merged documented by itself or with other keys.
Is pull_request.label available to a Github Action? Is there a comprehensive doc that shows all the keys available to a pull_request?
To list all labels you can use something like this
x=${{ toJson(github.event.pull_request.labels.*.name) }}
echo $x
Also to use a single label you can try
steps:
- name: deploy
if: contains(github.event.pull_request.labels.*.name, 'deploy')
run: |
echo "deploy"
Related
I am trying to use GitHub Actions to validate the book-keeping side of pull requests. Basically, the idea is that merging should be blocked unless certain tags, milestones, and other information is present in the PR. The logic I am currently struggling with is this: The PR needs to have one of two labels, "no release notes" or "public release notes" and if the "public release notes" label is present, then a specially formatted comment should be present with the release notes in question.
I have succeeded in getting the action to fire and update the check when the PR is created, or a label is added or removed. These paths modify the check status on the PR itself.
However, while I can get the Action to run when I add a PR comment (issue comment) this does not seem to update the check status. Is it possible to use an issue comment event to modify the check status of the PR directly?
The YML for the action is:
name: Github PR Audit
on:
pull_request:
types:
- opened
- edited
- labeled
- unlabeled
issue_comment:
types:
- created
- edited
- deleted
jobs:
Audit-Pull-Request:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
You can use the GitHub Script GH Action + Branch protection rules configuration.
GitHub Script Action provides an easy and elegant way to run scripts in your workflow and Branch protection rules allow configuring which status checks must pass before branches can be merged.
Example workflow:
name: Github PR Audit
on:
pull_request:
types:
- opened
- edited
- labeled
- unlabeled
issue_comment:
types:
- created
- edited
- deleted
jobs:
Audit-Pull-Request:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/github-script#v6
with:
script: |
const requiredLabels = ['no release notes', 'public release notes'];
let labels = [];
if (context.payload.pull_request) {
labels = context.payload.pull_request.labels;
} else if (context.payload.issue) {
labels = context.payload.issue.labels;
}
if (labels.filter(l => requiredLabels.includes(l.name)).length === 0) {
throw new Error(`Required labels: ${requiredLabels.join(', ')}`);
}
This script will check if its context has the corresponding labels and will fail if not.
Example failing run:
Branch protection rule configuration:
Creating a branch protection rule
I am writing a GitHub Action. I want some of my steps to run only on certain branches.
The whole action is set to run only on master and on branches beginning with features/lr.
on:
push:
branches:
- master
- features/lr*
I have a "deploy" step that I want to run on master and on branches beginning with features/lrd. (So for example if my branch is named features/lr-foo, then the deployment step should be skipped.)
I know I can do if conditionals like this:
- name: Deploy application
if: github.ref == 'refs/heads/master'
Can I also check whether github.ref matches a certain prefix or pattern? What is the syntax for that?
Something like this pseudocode:
- name: Deploy application
if: github.ref == 'refs/heads/master' || github.ref.matches('refs/heads/lrd*')
Thanks in advance!
The branches, branches-ignore, tags, and tags-ignore keywords accept glob patterns. You can check details in docs - filter pattern.
As for using expressions, docs don't mention matches function, but maybe you could use something like contains, startsWith or endsWith. See here for details.
Inspired by the answer from frennky, I ended up doing the following in my step, which is ugly but works:
- name: Deploy application
if: github.ref == 'refs/heads/master' || startsWith(github.ref, 'refs/heads/features/lrd')
I have a project with Github Actions that implements multiple workflows that can be triggered by a single push event (depending on path filter).
So a push with a single commit can trigger multiple workflows, so far so good.
In each workflow I am running actions/github-script to create dynamic run-checks with the following step:
- uses: actions/github-script#v4
with:
github-token: ${{ inputs.github-token }}
script: |
const date = new Date();
const check = await github.checks.create({
owner: "${{ steps.vars.outputs.owner }}",
repo: "${{ steps.vars.outputs.repo }}",
name: "Custom Script",
started_at: date.toISOString(),
completed_at: date.toISOString(),
head_sha: "${{ inputs.sha }}",
external_id: "${{ github.run_id }}",
status: "completed",
conclusion: "success",
output: {
title: "Some funny title",
summary: "Build successful",
text: "Image pushed to https://${{ inputs.region }}.console.aws.amazon.com/ecr/repositories/private/${{ inputs.customer-id }}/modix/base/${{ inputs.image }}"
}
});
It is working like a charm, when a single workflow is triggered, but as soon as a push triggers multiple workflows, then only the first one that runs is showing the added check. all others but the first don't show the check but also no error?
Before I have tried the LouisBrunner/checks-action and it had the same problem so I created an issue: https://github.com/LouisBrunner/checks-action/issues/26. But now that it also fails by directly using octokit with github-script action, it feels like the problem is somewhere else...
UPDATE:
According to Gregors answer, I have tried giving the check a different name in each workflow by appending the run-id, I found that each parallel workflow is adding the check to the workflow that runs first... so the question now is, how to send it to a specific workflow run?
according to these docs, there is no dedicated parameter for that, it seems that it automatically detects the workflow using the head_sha?
name: "Custom Script ${{ github.run_id }}",
Try setting Custom Script to something different for each check run you create. I think multiple check runs with the same names are collapsed into only showing the last one. The reason is that that way you can override an status on a commit, by using the same name.
Sadly I found that it is simply impossible to attach a check to a specific workflow-run or check-suite. The problem is known for over a year now, but they didn't provide any solution yet. See in this thread.
In the name of a big automotive company, I have now submitted a feature request in the official feedback form of github.
PS: If the feature will be implemented in the future, I am going to create and accept another answer here.
I am giving a coding lesson where students can upload answers to our quizzes using personal, private repositories. So here's how the repository structure of my organization looks like:
my_organization/student_1_project
my_organization/student_2_project
my_organization/...
my_organization/student_n_project
I would like to run a private GitHub Action at any push on a student repository. This Action would run partial reviews of the student's work, and notify me of stuffs. Its code would need to be unreachable from students, of course, otherwise providing hints & solutions.
I have three questions:
Can my workflow in e.g. my_organization/student_2_project be to use a private action my_organization/my_private_action? It seems like yes thanks to actions/checkout#v2 (see here) but pretty sure that involves playing with keys or tokens or secrets - I'm not so at ease with that and currently get an error although it does exist:
Error: fatal: repository 'https://github.com/my_organization/my_private_action' not found
Can it prevent the student (owner/admin of my_organization/student_2_project) to see the code in my_organization/my_private_action?
With the same constraints, could the private action be hosted in another organization?
Thanks a lot for your help!
This is how I understand the restrictions:
Using an action from a private/internal repository currently isn't supported directly, see this issue on the roadmap. A possible workaround is adding a personal access token with access to the private repo that contains the action and then checking it out like this:
- name: Get private repo with action
uses: actions/checkout#v2
with:
repository: yourorg/privateactionrepo
ref: master
token: ${{ secrets.PAT_TOKEN }}
path: .github/actions
You can then use the action in another step like
uses: ./.github/actions/actionname
The PAT can be a secret on the org level so you don't have to add it to every single student repo.
Since the student's repo has access to the PAT, they can use it to create a workflow that checks out the private repo and does whatever they want with it – upload its contents, print every file etc.
As long as the PAT has the permissions to check out the repo containing the action, the action can live anywhere, including in another organization.
Alternatively, if you want to prevent your students from seeing your action, you could add a workflow to your students' repositories that sends a request to the GitHub API and then have a trigger in your action on the repository_dispatch event.
I have an action job which upload the context to other website. The token was set and stored in the secret.MY_TOKEN.
But others who make the pull request also trigger this action job using the token I set.
How to limit the privilege of executing the jobs that only I can run this action job.
fyi my ci.yml as follow:
name: foobar
on: [push, pull_request]
jobs:
upload:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
....
- name: execute upload
env:
TOKEN: ${{ secrets.MYTOKEN }}
run:
upl --token ${TOKEN}
I assume there are two security problems here.
The token is printed in log file.
others who can use this private token by trigger action with their own purpose.
Use the github.repository_owner context
https://docs.github.com/en/actions/reference/context-and-expression-syntax-for-github-actions#github-context
The syntax should be something like:
- if: github.repository_owner == 'owner_name'
There is a new feature which could help, since July 2022:
Differentiating triggering actor from executing actor
Starting next week, workflow re-runs in GitHub Actions will use the initial run’s actor for privilege evaluation.
The actor who triggered the re-run will continue to be displayed in the UI, and can be accessed in a workflow via the triggering_actor field in the GitHub context.
Currently, the privileges (e.g. – secrets, permissions) of a run are derived from the triggering actor.
This poses a challenge in situations where the actor triggering a re-run is different than the original executing actor.
The upcoming change will differentiate the initial executing actor from the triggering actor, enabling the stable execution of re-runs.
For more details see Re-running workflows and jobs.
I don't believe allowing actions to run only for certain users is a native feature.
However, you could simply check the action context actor and exit early if the actor is not the yourself (or the owner of the repo, or whatever condition you'd like).