fix: avoid app token in changeset verification#525
Open
omribz156 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Contributor
|
@omribz156 is attempting to deploy a commit to the Vercel Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary:
actions/checkoutuse the default read-only token so fork PRs do not need repository secretsGITHUB_TOKENenv from the verifier stepVerification:
node --check .github/workflows/actions/verify-changesets/index.jsverifyChangesets()smoke test with a valid patch changesetgit diff --check -- .github/workflows/verify-changesets.yml .github/workflows/actions/verify-changesets/index.jsactionlint .github/workflows/verify-changesets.ymlThis keeps the workflow on
pull_requestinstead of moving topull_request_target, so fork PR validation remains unprivileged. It addresses the fork-secret failure path from #520; I left the separate missing-changeset guidance behavior alone because that likely needs a maintainer preference on whether to comment, warn, or enforce.Implemented with Codex assistance, with the workflow change kept focused and manually reviewed.