Add active committers API implementation

[ganeshkumarsv]

New Method for fetching active committers for an Organization
https://docs.github.com/en/rest/reference/billing#get-github-advanced-security-active-committers-for-an-organization

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2208 (54c9873) into master (b26fa8f) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## master #2208 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.79% 97.80% =======================================
Files 112 112 Lines 10036 10074 +38 =======================================
+ Hits 9815 9853 +38 
Misses 154 154 Partials 67 67 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
github/billing.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
github/actions_workflow_runs.go	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update b26fa8f...54c9873. Read the comment docs.

[ganeshkumarsv]

@gmlewis I guess I addressed all the review comments. Please let me know if everything looks alright. Thanks!

[gmlewis]

If it isn't a reference type (e.g. *int in this case) then it doesn't need the omitempty.

Suggested change

	TotalAdvancedSecurityCommittersint`json:"total_advanced_security_committers,omitempty"`
	TotalAdvancedSecurityCommittersint`json:"total_advanced_security_committers"`

[ganeshkumarsv]

@gmlewis can I know how we find out if its a reference type or not?

[gmlewis]

@gmlewis can I know how we find out if its a reference type or not?

There are a few scenarios where reference types are needed and/or desired:

• When the response might not populate the field,
• When an option being sent from the client to the server is optional and we don't want the zero value of the field to be sent
• When we have a slice of a struct, it is desirable to iterate over a slice of pointers rather than a slice of values.

Conversely, if a field is already a reference type (for example, a slice or an interface), we don't typically want to have a pointer to it. In other words, if you ever see *[]something or *[]*something` then that is typically suspect and not desirable.

I hope that helps.

[ganeshkumarsv]

@gmlewis I guess I addressed all the comments. Please let me know if the changes look alright! Thanks for the review!

[gmlewis]

Thank you, @ganeshkumarsv !
LGTM.

Awaiting second LGTM before merging.

(Please note that ALL other contributors to this repo are welcome to provide the second PR review/comment/approval that we need for merging and that we are not waiting for any particular reviewer unless otherwise noted.)

[ganeshkumarsv]

@cpanato@gunadhya@sagar23sj
I see you have contributed to billing.go and billing_test.go. Can anyone please review and approve my PR? 🙇

[cpanato]

looks great to me, thanks for adding that

[gmlewis]

Thank you, @cpanato !
Merging.

[ganeshkumarsv]

@gmlewis can we have a minor release?

[gmlewis]

@gmlewis can we have a minor release?

I will work on a release, but due to the breaking API change in #2205, it will be a major release.

[gmlewis]

@ganeshkumarsv - this change is now incorporated in the new release:
https://github.com/google/go-github/releases/tag/v41.0.0