Remove params from repo rulesets update rule

[o-sama]

I was testing out this functionality and noticed that I can send a request with params set for update rule which is fine since it seems the GitHub API doesn’t actually check parameters with this rule as it doesn’t expect any.

However, if I try reading a ruleset which contains an update rule, it returns an object with ”type”: “update" and no parameters. This is also the same behaviour as the GitHub UI where you cannot set parameters for update rules or see any parameters for it. I looked at the request to read rulesets as sent by the frontend and found:

{
"type": "update",
"target": "branch",
"displayName": "Restrict updates",
"description": "Only allow users with bypass permission to update matching refs.",
"parameterSchema": {
"type": "object",
"name": null,
"display_name": null,
"description": null,
"required": true,
"root": true,
"internal": false,
"org_only": false,
"supported_plan": null,
"default_value": null,
"validator": null,
"ui_control": null,
"visibility_fn": null,
"fields": []
},
"metadataPatternSchema": null
}

Leads me to think there was an undocumented change in behaviour in the API.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2836 (180ce52) into master (b02bb75) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@ Coverage Diff @@## master #2836 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 98.06% 98.06% -0.01% 
==========================================
Files 137 137 Lines 12291 12277 -14 ==========================================
- Hits 12053 12039 -14 
Misses 162 162 Partials 76 76 

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
github/repos_rules.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

[gmlewis]

@liaodaniel - can you please take a look since you are the original author?

[liaodaniel]

@o-sama, you are indeed correct. I was able to reproduce this behavior as well.

The GitHub documentation still shows the following:

I wonder if it might be worth reaching out to the GitHub support team to confirm if this is the intended API behavior?

[gmlewis]

Thank you, @liaodaniel !

I wonder if it might be worth reaching out to the GitHub support team to confirm if this is the intended API behavior?

That would be great if one of you would like to volunteer. 😁💜

[o-sama]

I’m actually meeting with some folks from GitHub in a couple of hours for something else, I’ll bring this up and confirm 😄

[gmlewis]

I’m actually meeting with some folks from GitHub in a couple of hours for something else, I’ll bring this up and confirm 😄

Thank you, @o-sama ! I appreciate it!

[o-sama]

Question is being forwarded to the PM responsible for repo rules to confirm whether it is an upcoming feature or an older feature which was cut. Will update here and if it is an upcoming feature I’ll close out PR 🙂

[felixlut]

Could I ask for a new release once this issue is resolved? I'm working on implementing Repository Rulesets in the github terraform provider, which is currently blocked by this

[o-sama]

@felixlut I’ve actually also already started working on repo/org rulesets in the TF provider and have all CRUD working for repo rulesets, with the focus shifting to org rulesets in the next couple of days. I just made a WIP PR and mentioned you in it, If you’d like we can pair on it?

[felixlut]

@o-sama Sure, I'll take a proper look at your code tomorrow after work, and we can combine the best parts! As you can see in my PR, I very much wanted feedback anyways 😄

[o-sama]

JFYI: I haven’t forgotten about this PR, just waiting on feedback on the question I raised to my contact at GitHub who comes back from vacation on Friday.

[o-sama]

Looks like this is a feature available specifically for forked repos. However, I was told it’s bugged even for those. Closing this since it’s unneeded.