I tried this out in a new project with no secrets or access tokens configured (but using @ghtoken for the branch), and I'm still getting You must provide the action with either a Personal Access Token or the GitHub Token secret in order to deploy.: https://github.com/nickmccurdy/manuals/runs/215402909

@nickmccurdy The description of this PR is slightly misleading, I apologize about that. You still require either a GitHub token or an Access Token for this to work. The biggest difference is that the GitHub token is a built in secret on the repository, which means you don't need to manually generate credentials in order for the deployment

This PR is still blocked however, as the GitHub token still isn't enough for the action to trigger a pages build. You can track the progress of this in issue #5.

Does this mean I can use the built in GITHUB_TOKEN if I explicitly configure it in the workflow’s access tokens, or would that still not work because of the bug?

That’s the intent, but it will not work right now. The readme was updated along with the PR but it won’t be valid until it merges.

@JamesIves I think I tracked down the problem. If the push to the pages branch only ever comes from Actions (as in, no human has ever edited it manually), the page deployment won't kick off. Once a branch is edited by a user, subsequent pushes from Actions should kick off the deployment. Could you confirm if this is what you're seeing? If you can edit one of the files in your Pages branch in the browser and that should kick off a deployment. Then after that I suspect the GITHUB_TOKEN method will work. This is just a workaround for now and I'm working on a PR to fix it, I just want to confirm if this is the problem you're seeing.

@tcbyrd That's correct - I reported something similar to GitHub support a couple of months ago. If it's helpful I can grant GitHub staff access to my test repo if you'd like to try it out yourself. Lemme know!