Skip to content

Conversation

@roadlittledawn
Copy link
Contributor

Why:

Scanning this page took us about 30min to find an important tidbit of info re: GITHUB_TOKEN being the only available secret available for a runner on a forked repo.

What's being changed:

Changed a reusable snippet that contained an important tidbit about the GITHUB_TOKEN env var into a note callout. Wasn't sure if it should always be a called out, but we would certainly find that helpful. Otherwise, maybe the snippet should just be wrapped in a note?

Check off the following:

@welcome
Copy link

welcome bot commented Mar 15, 2021

Thanks for opening this pull request! A GitHub docs team member should be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, please check out the contributing guidelines.

@janiceilene
Copy link
Contributor

@roadlittledawn Thanks so much for opening a PR! I'll get this triaged for review ⚡

@janiceilene janiceilene added actions This issue or pull request should be reviewed by the docs actions team waiting for review Issue/PR is waiting for a writer's review labels Mar 16, 2021
@skedwards88 skedwards88 self-assigned this Mar 23, 2021
@skedwards88
Copy link
Contributor

@roadlittledawn Thanks for your contribution! This reusable is used in a few places (3 times in Events that trigger workflows and once in Encrypted secrets). Can you share which section felt like it needed a callout? I ask because in the "Events that trigger workflows" article, this will now result in 3 notes close together, so we may want to consider a different solution, like just wrapping the reusable in a note in the "Encrypted secrets" article if that was where you felt needed the additional highlight:

image

@skedwards88 skedwards88 removed their assignment Mar 26, 2021
@skedwards88 skedwards88 removed the waiting for review Issue/PR is waiting for a writer's review label Mar 26, 2021
@roadlittledawn
Copy link
Contributor Author

@skedwards88 yeah i kind of wondered if the reusable content snippet should only be given the callout treatment in context of the article and not everywhere. the section we were reading that prompted to file PR was this one:

https://docs.github.com/en/actions/reference/encrypted-secrets#using-encrypted-secrets-in-a-workflow

@janiceilene janiceilene added the waiting for review Issue/PR is waiting for a writer's review label Mar 31, 2021
@skedwards88
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for adding this context! I think adding the note markup just around this instance of the resuable would make more sense. Feel free to make this change or to add the help wanted label to this PR. Thanks again for your contribution!

@hubwriter hubwriter dismissed a stale review via f815f9c April 30, 2021 09:18
@hubwriter
Copy link
Contributor

I've applied the changed agreed by @roadlittledawn above - i.e. put the text in a note box just in this article.

@hubwriter
Copy link
Contributor

@roadlittledawn - Many thanks for pointing this out and suggesting the change. Much appreciated.

I'm going to merge this now.

@hubwriter hubwriter enabled auto-merge (squash) April 30, 2021 09:23
@hubwriter hubwriter merged commit 088db64 into github:main Apr 30, 2021
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks very much for contributing! Your pull request has been merged 🎉 You should see your changes appear on the site in approximately 24 hours. If you're looking for your next contribution, check out our help wanted issues

@roadlittledawn
Copy link
Contributor Author

thanks much!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

actions This issue or pull request should be reviewed by the docs actions team waiting for review Issue/PR is waiting for a writer's review

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants