Add missing permission-discussions input to action.yml#360
Add missing permission-discussions input to action.yml#360salmanmkc wants to merge 1 commit intoactions:mainfrom
permission-discussions input to action.yml#360Conversation
The discussions permission is already handled at runtime via process.env but was not declared in action.yml, causing an 'Unexpected input' warning when users set it. This adds the missing input declaration to match the other permission inputs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds the missing permission-discussions input to the action metadata so workflows can set this permission without triggering the “Unexpected input” warning, aligning action.yml with the action’s runtime permission handling.
Changes:
- Declare
permission-discussionsunder the generated permissions inputs block inaction.yml.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| action.yml | Adds the missing permission-discussions input declaration to eliminate “Unexpected input” warnings. |
Copilot's findings
Tip
Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
- Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
- Comments generated: 1
| permission-discussions: | ||
| description: "The level of permission to grant the access token for discussions. Can be set to 'read' or 'write'." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This input is inside the # <START GENERATED PERMISSIONS INPUTS> block, but the generator (scripts/update-permission-inputs.js) currently derives inputs from scripts/generated/app-permissions.json, which does not include a discussions permission. Re-running the update script (e.g., when package.json/package-lock.json changes) will likely remove permission-discussions and reintroduce the warning. Please update the source of generation as well (e.g., bump @octokit/openapi to a schema version that includes discussions, or patch the generator to append this permission) so the generated block remains stable.
|
Note: This is a short-term fix. The The proper long-term fix is adding |
|
Closing in favor of #358. |
Problem
The
discussionspermission is already handled at runtime viaprocess.env(like all other permissions), but it was never declared as an input inaction.yml. This causes an "Unexpected input 'permission-discussions'" warning when users set it in their workflows.Fix
Add the
permission-discussionsinput declaration toaction.yml, matching the pattern of all other permission inputs. This is a 2-line change — no runtime behavior changes.Related
permission-discussionsinput to action.yml #359