Skip to content

distinguish API before and after GHES 3.2#11841

Merged
felicitymay merged 6 commits intogithub:mainfrom
pberthonneau:patch-2
Nov 30, 2021
Merged

distinguish API before and after GHES 3.2#11841
felicitymay merged 6 commits intogithub:mainfrom
pberthonneau:patch-2

Conversation

@pberthonneau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@pberthonneau pberthonneau commented Nov 10, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Why:

I made 2 changes in the sentence for ghes:

To monitor results from secret scanning across your private repositories or your organization, you can use the secret scanning API. For more information about API endpoints, see "Secret scanning."

  1. or your organization is only valid from 3.2 because before there is not secret scanning API at org level.

  2. I have also removed the word private because for ghes with advanced security, secret scanning work the same way on public, internal and private repos. I assume this is the same for ghec.

Note that a similar mention of private in the API looks wrong to me. I'm using it with public repositories.

What's being changed:

Check off the following:

  • I have been able to review my changes in staging (look for "Automatically generated comment" and click Modified to view your latest changes).
  • For content changes, I have completed the self-review checklist.

Writer impact (This section is for GitHub staff members only):

  • This pull request impacts the contribution experience
    • I have added the 'writer impact' label
    • I have added a description and/or a video demo of the changes below (e.g. a "before and after video")

@pberthonneau
distinguish API before and after GHES 3.2
b504727 
before 3.2: API endpoints work at repository level only
from 3.2: API endpoints also include org
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the triage Do not begin working on this issue until triaged by the team label Nov 10, 2021
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Nov 10, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Automatically generated comment ℹ️

This comment is automatically generated and will be overwritten every time changes are committed to this branch.

The table contains an overview of files in the content directory that have been changed in this pull request. It's provided to make it easy to review your changes on the staging site. Please note that changes to the data directory will not show up in this table.

Content directory changes

You may find it useful to copy this table into the pull request summary. There you can edit it to share links to important articles or changes and to give a high-level overview of how the changes in your pull request support the overall goals of the pull request.

Source Staging Production What Changed
content/code-security/secret-scanning/about-secret-scanning.md Modified Original

@ramyaparimi ramyaparimi added content This issue or pull request belongs to the Docs Content team waiting for review Issue/PR is waiting for a writer's review and removed triage Do not begin working on this issue until triaged by the team labels Nov 11, 2021
@ramyaparimi
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ramyaparimi commented Nov 11, 2021

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

felicitymay
felicitymay reviewed Nov 29, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@felicitymay felicitymay left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@pberthonneau - thanks for opening this PR ✨

or your organization is only valid from 3.2 because before there is not secret scanning API at org level.

You're right. This is a bug in the current docs and your fix for this looks great 👍🏻

I have also removed the word private because for ghes with advanced security, secret scanning work the same way on public, internal and private repos. I assume this is the same for ghec.

I think you're also right that the word "private" here is wrong for GHES, but I think that it is correct for GHEC where public repositories are treated differently. I'll check with the secret scanning team. If I'm right, then I'll apply my suggested change to your PR and look at whether we can also get the API reference docs updated for GHES.

Comment thread content/code-security/secret-scanning/about-secret-scanning.md Outdated
felicitymay
felicitymay approved these changes Nov 30, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@felicitymay felicitymay left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've checked the preview: About secret scanning and this now accurately:

  • Mentions organizations only for GHES 3.2+ and GitHub.com
  • Mentions private repositories only for GitHub.com versions

I've opened an internal issue for the other bug you spotted. The API reference docs for GHES should not mention "private repositories" 🙇🏻‍♀️

@felicitymay
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

felicitymay commented Nov 30, 2021

The failing test is a known issue and unrelated to these changes, so this PR can be merged if all other tests pass.

@felicitymay felicitymay enabled auto-merge (squash) November 30, 2021 09:22
@felicitymay felicitymay added ready to merge This pull request is ready to merge and removed waiting for review Issue/PR is waiting for a writer's review labels Nov 30, 2021
@felicitymay felicitymay merged commit b12064f into github:main Nov 30, 2021
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Nov 30, 2021

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 ⚡

@pberthonneau pberthonneau deleted the patch-2 branch December 14, 2021 22:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

1 more reviewer

@felicitymay felicitymay felicitymay approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

content This issue or pull request belongs to the Docs Content team ready to merge This pull request is ready to merge

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@pberthonneau @ramyaparimi @felicitymay @docubot