feat : Support repository property for GitHub organization ruleset by Moser-ss · Pull Request #2356 · integrations/terraform-provider-github

Moser-ss · 2024-08-20T18:46:52Z

Resolves #2137
Introduces the support to use repository_property to target repositories in the ruleset

The changes were manually tested against a GitHub Organization with an enterprise plan.
It is not possible to add properties with the source system because the lib version doesn't allow that. It is necessary to update to version v65

Before the change?

Cannot target ruleset using repository_property

After the change?

The ruleset can use the repository_property under the conditions block

Pull request checklist

Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
Docs have been reviewed and added / updated if needed (for bug fixes / features)

Does this introduce a breaking change?

Please see our docs on breaking changes to help!

Yes
No

Moser-ss · 2024-09-07T22:36:46Z

@kfcampbell, could you take a quick look to see if I need to improve anything in this PR

kfcampbell

Thanks! Have you looked at expanding the tests in github/resource_github_organization_ruleset_test.go to cover this usecase yet?

Moser-ss · 2024-09-13T17:48:17Z

A test case was added, I hope the change was not to ugly

Moser-ss · 2024-10-05T14:15:31Z

@kfcampbell can I do anything to speed up the review of this PR?

stevehipwell · 2024-11-05T12:08:12Z

@Moser-ss I think you need to update the docs to reflect these changes?

Moser-ss · 2024-11-09T19:07:08Z

@stevehipwell Docs updated, thanks for catching that.

wrighbr · 2024-11-14T02:04:20Z

@PaarthShah @kfcampbell Would you have an estimate on when this PR might be reviewed and merged?

PaarthShah · 2024-11-14T03:53:57Z

@PaarthShah @kfcampbell Would you have an estimate on when this PR might be reviewed and merged?

@wrighbr No idea, I'm not a maintainer 😅

alexymantha · 2024-12-16T14:48:30Z

We also need this feature. It's been stale for a little while, anything we can do to get this merged?

daniddelrio · 2024-12-30T09:34:10Z

+1 on this PR. Would be great if this can get merged soon

ChrisStatham · 2025-01-07T18:38:12Z

@kfcampbell If you have a chance to review this feature it would be appreciated thanks!

aditya-nair1 · 2025-01-07T19:01:22Z

@kfcampbell +1, thanks!

vimc9 · 2025-01-07T19:56:43Z

@kfcampbell would be grateful for your review here 🚀 🚀 🚀

tayven-bigelow · 2025-01-27T19:19:54Z

@kfcampbell - Any chance of getting a review / approval of this PR?

graham1228 · 2025-03-14T15:35:15Z

➕ 1️⃣ on getting this merged. Would love to migrate our bash scripts to TF, but need this functionality.

lfraile · 2025-04-07T06:54:40Z

+1 On desperately needing this PR to get approved :(

tayven-bigelow · 2025-04-07T19:58:49Z

@kfcampbell - Is there any chance we could get this merged?
Is there something missing or any sort of directive as to why it hasn't been approved?

stevehipwell · 2025-04-08T11:16:53Z

@tayven-bigelow check out the commit history for this repo, I don't think GitHub are providing engineering resources here at the moment.

loksonarius · 2025-05-19T21:05:17Z

tyvm for setting up this PR, I really hope it merges in soon 🙏

Maksym-Perehinets · 2025-11-14T21:49:25Z

hi, is there any chance to get this one merged?
+1

deiga · 2025-11-18T12:36:42Z

Hey there 👋

We're looking into getting this into a mergeable state :)

This PR will need to wait until #2891 is merged as the ruleset resources in the SDK have changed.

@Moser-ss Could you try rebasing and retargeting this branch to go-github-v68?

These tests check validation that was handover to the Terraform built-in validation

Improve e2e tests for the ruleset and improve documentation

Setup the tests case using the config instead of using the API

…consistency

… in organization ruleset

…zation ruleset tests

jack-sdx · 2026-03-20T23:14:45Z

Really looking forward to this capability. 🚀

…ory conditions ExactlyOneOf has known issues with nested optional list blocks in Terraform SDK. Use ConflictsWith + AtLeastOneOf pattern for reliable "exactly one" validation across repository_name, repository_id, and repository_property conditions. Updated test expectations to match new error message format from ConflictsWith. Addresses feedback from PR integrations#2356 comment r2968116244, references fix from integrations#3235

Moser-ss · 2026-03-20T23:43:01Z

@deiga PR rebased, and applied the changes requested by @mkushakov
Also ran the tests, fmt and lint

deiga · 2026-03-21T07:04:11Z

@stevehipwell @robert-crandall this has been stuck with problems on our side very long.
Could we prioritise it's review and merge?

stevehipwell

LGTM

stevehipwell · 2026-03-22T16:02:41Z

@robert-crandall could you please review this?

deiga · 2026-03-23T16:06:57Z

@robert-crandall Thanks! Could you check the mergeability if this PR? At some point it was blocked due to open comments, which we couldn't resolve

mkushakov · 2026-03-23T16:20:13Z

@robert-crandall Thanks! Could you check the mergeability if this PR? At some point it was blocked due to open comments, which we couldn't resolve

@deiga if you click this small icon, it should show you unresolved comments which are sometimes invisible due to force-pushing or long PR discussions:

deiga · 2026-03-23T16:32:53Z

@mkushakov Thanks, I think we checked those and they were missing any way to resolve them 😬

mkushakov · 2026-03-23T16:41:36Z

@deiga can you try to click this small check button?

This was addressed

robert-crandall · 2026-03-23T17:12:55Z

@deiga Can you try resolving conversations with blocking changes requested? For example, #2356 (comment)

deiga · 2026-03-23T18:32:51Z

@deiga Can you try resolving conversations with blocking changes requested? For example, #2356 (comment)

That's not mine, so I can't 😬 @Moser-ss maybe can?

The one comment which is mine just shows an error when clicking on the resolve button...

robert-crandall · 2026-03-23T18:43:56Z

@deiga I've resolved the remaining unresolved conversations, you are good to merge this now.

…ntegrations#2356) * Define schema for repository_property Refactor expandConditions to reduce complexity Refactor logic to reduce the cognitive complexity and add logic to handle the repository_property field Flatten conditions for repository_property and fix schemas Add test case when ruleset use repository_property Refactor repository property conditions to make them optional Flatten update Target parameters to allow the detection of changes when remote resource is updated Update documentation * Apply format in the code base * Fix repository_property validation and docs - Add ValidateFunc to include.source field for consistency with exclude - Update docs to mention repository_property as third targeting option - Fix missing space in documentation * Support repository_property in push rulesets * Remove unused customdiff imports * Replace custom validation with built-in ExactlyOneOf for repo targeting Add ExactlyOneOf/AtLeastOneOf to repository_property, repository_name,repository_id fields. Remove manual validation counting in util_ruleset_validation.Add 3 validation tests for single/multiple/missing repo targeting options. Addresses PR integrations#2356 review feedback - simplifies validation using schema constraints. * Rever unintencial change * Add tests, docs, and fix default handling for repository_property - Add doc example for repository_property usage - Add tests for exclude block, multiple properties, and updates - Fix source field default handling in flatten function to prevent diffs * Apply suggestions from PR comment * Add unit tests * Remove redundant condition * Updated description based in the GitHub API docs * Apply linter and fmt * Remove unnecessary checks * Remove tests These tests check validation that was handover to the Terraform built-in validation * Improve syntax for include and exclude property Improve e2e tests for the ruleset and improve documentation * Use t context * Rewrite tests using the resource_github_organization_custom_properties Setup the tests case using the config instead of using the API * Refactor repository property names in organization ruleset tests for consistency * Refactor tests to use state checks for repository property validation in organization ruleset * Update repository property references to use default_branch in organization ruleset tests * Fix: Replace ExactlyOneOf with ConflictsWith/AtLeastOneOf for repository conditions ExactlyOneOf has known issues with nested optional list blocks in Terraform SDK. Use ConflictsWith + AtLeastOneOf pattern for reliable "exactly one" validation across repository_name, repository_id, and repository_property conditions. Updated test expectations to match new error message format from ConflictsWith. Addresses feedback from PR integrations#2356 comment r2968116244, references fix from integrations#3235 * Apply lint

Moser-ss marked this pull request as draft August 20, 2024 18:57

Moser-ss marked this pull request as ready for review August 20, 2024 22:58

Moser-ss force-pushed the Support-repository_property-for-github_organization_ruleset branch from bb62d7a to 40c5111 Compare August 28, 2024 13:17

Moser-ss changed the title ~~Support repository property for GitHub organization ruleset~~ feat : Support repository property for GitHub organization ruleset Sep 3, 2024

Moser-ss mentioned this pull request Sep 7, 2024

[FEAT]: Support targeting dynamic list by properties in organizational rulesets #2137

Closed

1 task

kfcampbell reviewed Sep 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

PaarthShah reviewed Oct 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

Comment thread github/resource_github_organization_ruleset.go

dlaguerta mentioned this pull request Apr 28, 2025

[FEAT]: support organization level custom_property resource and custom_properties datasource #2642

Open

1 task

loksonarius reviewed May 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread website/docs/r/organization_ruleset.html.markdown Outdated

loksonarius reviewed May 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread website/docs/r/organization_ruleset.html.markdown Outdated

Moser-ss added 9 commits March 20, 2026 23:02

Apply linter and fmt

d1fdf0a

Remove unnecessary checks

cfca003

Remove tests

ce28407

These tests check validation that was handover to the Terraform built-in validation

Improve syntax for include and exclude property

478b3a6

Improve e2e tests for the ruleset and improve documentation

Use t context

1218be1

Rewrite tests using the resource_github_organization_custom_properties

5c341fa

Setup the tests case using the config instead of using the API

Refactor repository property names in organization ruleset tests for …

b47419f

…consistency

Refactor tests to use state checks for repository property validation…

d8bbf2b

… in organization ruleset

Update repository property references to use default_branch in organi…

28a0de8

…zation ruleset tests

Moser-ss added 2 commits March 20, 2026 23:33

Apply lint

1bf703e

Moser-ss force-pushed the Support-repository_property-for-github_organization_ruleset branch from 4ea85bf to 1bf703e Compare March 20, 2026 23:41

stevehipwell approved these changes Mar 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

robert-crandall approved these changes Mar 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

stevehipwell merged commit 94f71cf into integrations:main Mar 23, 2026
7 checks passed

github-project-automation Bot moved this from BLOCKED to Done in Terraform Provider Mar 23, 2026

github-project-automation Bot moved this from 🏗 In progress to ✅ Done in 🧰 Octokit Active Mar 23, 2026

Conversation

Moser-ss commented Aug 20, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Before the change?

After the change?

Pull request checklist

Does this introduce a breaking change?

Uh oh!

Moser-ss commented Sep 7, 2024

Uh oh!

kfcampbell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Moser-ss commented Sep 13, 2024

Uh oh!

Moser-ss commented Oct 5, 2024

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

stevehipwell commented Nov 5, 2024

Uh oh!

Moser-ss commented Nov 9, 2024

Uh oh!

wrighbr commented Nov 14, 2024

Uh oh!

PaarthShah commented Nov 14, 2024

Uh oh!

alexymantha commented Dec 16, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

daniddelrio commented Dec 30, 2024

Uh oh!

ChrisStatham commented Jan 7, 2025

Uh oh!

aditya-nair1 commented Jan 7, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

vimc9 commented Jan 7, 2025

Uh oh!

tayven-bigelow commented Jan 27, 2025

Uh oh!

graham1228 commented Mar 14, 2025

Uh oh!

lfraile commented Apr 7, 2025

Uh oh!

tayven-bigelow commented Apr 7, 2025

Uh oh!

stevehipwell commented Apr 8, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

loksonarius commented May 19, 2025

Uh oh!

Maksym-Perehinets commented Nov 14, 2025

Uh oh!

deiga commented Nov 18, 2025

Uh oh!

jack-sdx commented Mar 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Moser-ss commented Mar 20, 2026

Uh oh!

deiga commented Mar 21, 2026

Uh oh!

stevehipwell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

stevehipwell commented Mar 22, 2026

Uh oh!

deiga commented Mar 23, 2026

Uh oh!

mkushakov commented Mar 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

deiga commented Mar 23, 2026

Uh oh!

mkushakov commented Mar 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

robert-crandall commented Mar 23, 2026

Uh oh!

deiga commented Mar 23, 2026

Moser-ss commented Aug 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

alexymantha commented Dec 16, 2024 •

edited

Loading

aditya-nair1 commented Jan 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mkushakov commented Mar 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

mkushakov commented Mar 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading