GV

GeezerVison

The World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory.

Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites

On this site

  • Sign in
  • ActionsCI/CD and automation
  • CodespacesCloud development environments
  • All Features
  • Documentation
  • Training
  • Certifications
  • Build with Copilot
  • Customize Copilot
  • Integrations
  • Trending repos
  • GitHub Sponsors
  • Developer articles
  • Enterprises

This view

  • Original page
  • New address

GeezerVison is showing github.com — make octokit instance available as octokit on top of github, to make it easier to seamlessly copy examples from GitHub rest api or octokit documentations by iamstarkov · Pull Request #508 · actions/github-script

Conversation

@iamstarkov

@iamstarkov iamstarkov commented Jan 15, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

examples on GitHub api documentation use octokit as an octokit instance, so does the octokit documentation itself. its kinda a bummer to always rename when you copy from documentation or from another files.

I understand that octokit was made available over the github keyword, and I dont want to break that, but it won't hurt nobody to expose octokit instance over the octokit keyword as well and it will help people who use documentation a lot

// api docs
await octokit.request('GET /repos/{owner}/{repo}/commits/{commit_sha}/pulls', {
  owner: 'OWNER',
  repo: 'REPO',
  commit_sha: 'COMMIT_SHA',
})

// octokit documentation
octokit.rest.repos.listPullRequestsAssociatedWithCommit({
  owner,
  repo,
  commit_sha,
});

what do you think? if this is something you are up for adding, let me know and I adjust documentation accordingly

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
@iamstarkov
iamstarkov requested a review from a team as a code owner January 15, 2025 18:22
@joshmgross

joshmgross commented Jan 17, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for the suggestion @iamstarkov - my one concern with this change is that users may assume octokit is Octokit and that could create additional confusion if something does not work as expected.
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@iamstarkov

iamstarkov commented Jan 19, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

my two cents would be that I used github-scripts heavily in the last few years and I'd not make that mistake, and also I think javascript developers are grown to know the difference Class and an instance.
That is to say, your concerns are not without merit, but I dont think we should underestimate developers. If we want, we have an option to remedy this potential issue by explicitly passing Octokit class explicitly

And my last argument will be that consistency with documentation will lead to net-smaller confusion after all. What do you think?
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@joshmgross

joshmgross commented Jan 28, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@iamstarkov I'm fine with this change - could we update the documentation as well to make it clear that this is an option?
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@iamstarkov

iamstarkov commented Jan 31, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@joshmgross absolutely
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
iamstarkov and others added 2 commits January 31, 2025 11:20
@iamstarkov
make octokit instance available as octokit on top of github, to make …
4024541 
…it easier to seamless to copy examples from GitHub api or octokit documentation
@iamstarkov
replace GitHub with octokit in the README, but keep a note of the Git…
f23cd47 
…Hub still being available
@iamstarkov
iamstarkov force-pushed the patch-2 branch from 5e88bb6 to f23cd47 Compare January 31, 2025 10:20
@iamstarkov

iamstarkov commented Jan 31, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@joshmgross updated documentation as we agreed, feel free to take a look
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@iamstarkov
fix: adjust types
6320504
@iamstarkov

iamstarkov commented Jan 31, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

checked out project locally, adjusted types and committed updated dist folder accordingly
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@iamstarkov iamstarkov changed the title make octokit instance available as octokit on top of github, to make it easier to seamless to copy examples from GitHub api or octokit documentation make octokit instance available as octokit on top of github, to make it easier to seamlessly copy examples from GitHub rest api or octokit documentations Jan 31, 2025
@iamstarkov

iamstarkov commented Jan 31, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I have off topic to PR question, which i'm curious about

GitHub assigned this PR to a team without assigning anyone.

Screenshot 2025-01-31 at 12 00 05

is CODEOWNERS correct and @actions/actions-launch exists, but its not public?
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@joshmgross

joshmgross commented Feb 4, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@iamstarkov yes that is a team, that's not my area of GitHub but my understanding is that organization teams are never public and can only be internal to all organization members or hidden.
iamstarkov reacted with thumbs up emoji
All reactions
  • 👍 1 reaction

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
joshmgross
joshmgross approved these changes Feb 4, 2025
View reviewed changes
@iamstarkov
iamstarkov temporarily deployed to debug-integration-test February 4, 2025 15:45 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@joshmgross
joshmgross merged commit 378a50f into actions:main Feb 4, 2025
@iamstarkov
iamstarkov deleted the patch-2 branch February 4, 2025 21:05
@iamstarkov

iamstarkov commented Feb 4, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

how does the release process look like for this action? I noticed 41 unreleased commits since last release
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@juwens juwens mentioned this pull request Feb 26, 2025
octokit instance from README examples doesn't work #545
Closed
joshmgross added a commit to joshmgross/actions-testing that referenced this pull request Feb 26, 2025
@joshmgross
Validate actions/github-script#508
b1f5520
This was referenced Feb 26, 2025
v9 Tracking Issue #556
Open
Remove octokit README updates for v7 #557
Merged
@joshmgross joshmgross mentioned this pull request Jun 3, 2025
Replace @action/github dependency with latest Octokit #614
Closed
@github-actions github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Sep 4, 2025
Bump actions/github-script from 7 to 8 labrynx/auto_comments#29
Merged
corymhall added a commit to pulumi/ci-mgmt that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2025
@corymhall
Fix update-workflows job
d77e483 
The update-workflow job has been failing for the last week due to a
[breaking change](actions/github-script#508) in
the github-script action.

fixes #1694, fixes #1697
@corymhall corymhall mentioned this pull request Sep 10, 2025
Fix update-workflows job pulumi/ci-mgmt#1701
Merged
github-merge-queue Bot pushed a commit to pulumi/ci-mgmt that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2025
@corymhall
Fix update-workflows job (#1701)
4125efb 
The update-workflow job has been failing for the last week due to a
[breaking change](actions/github-script#508) in
the github-script action.

I tested this on the single provider update here
https://github.com/pulumi/ci-mgmt/actions/runs/17615634066/job/50047844245

fixes #1694, fixes #1697
@github-actions github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Nov 18, 2025
Bump actions/github-script from 7 to 8 senzing-factory/build-resources#236
Merged
khanbilal732
khanbilal732 approved these changes Dec 2, 2025
View reviewed changes

This branch was previously deployed

1 inactive deployment
debug-integration-test — 63205042 Deployed Feb 4, 2025 by iamstarkov
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

2 more reviewers
@joshmgross joshmgross joshmgross approved these changes
@khanbilal732 khanbilal732 khanbilal732 approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

3 participants

@iamstarkov @joshmgross @khanbilal732
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.
You are visitor 01402503 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.