Skip to content

Conversation

@pascal-hofmann
Copy link
Contributor

@pascal-hofmann pascal-hofmann commented Apr 13, 2023

Resolves #1071


Additional info

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)
  • Added the appropriate label for the given change -> No permissions to add labels. :(

Does this introduce a breaking change?

Please see our docs on breaking changes to help!

Pull request type

  • Feature/model/API additions: Type: Feature

@kfcampbell
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you @pascal-hofmann! Do you mind helping me run these tests? They're passing for me on the main branch but failing on this branch with a Error: PATCH https://api.github.com/repos/kfcampbell-terraform-provider/tf-acc-test-pub-vuln-3xaws: 422 This organization does not allow private repository forking [] error. That's weird to me, since my repository has private forking enabled everywhere:

image

Does it pass for you?

@pascal-hofmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

@kfcampbell No, it does not. :(

No idea what's wrong here…

@sergiuciudin
Copy link

Any chance of getting this merged?

@yaroslav-nakonechnikov
Copy link

is it forgotten?

@pascal-hofmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've just rebased this PR and resolved the conflicts.

@glerchundi
Copy link

glerchundi commented Apr 8, 2024

Is there anything it can be done to push this forward? In highly automated environments as ours, and trying to push innersourcing internally, this is a bump on the road. Let us know if there's something we can do to help you on this.

Thanks! 🙏

@harpunius
Copy link

Hey, what is blocking this PR? We'd love to have it.

@mjarends-cna
Copy link

Is this something that will be resolved soon? We are having to work around not having this attribute available in Terraform

@aamkye
Copy link

aamkye commented Sep 30, 2024

@pascal-hofmann, please resolve the conflicts, then @kfcampbell, please look at this.

@pascal-hofmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

@kfcampbell Seems like the tests work this time.

@Arlington1985
Copy link

Any ETA when it can be merged?

@skymalorid
Copy link

skymalorid commented Nov 19, 2024

Any idea when it will be possible to merge it?

@yurii-kysil
Copy link
Contributor

It would be very helpful for us also. Is there are any updates regarding ETA?

@CasVissers-360ERP
Copy link

+1

@chiradeepsai
Copy link

@pascal-hofmann please let us know when this can me merged??

@pascal-hofmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

I just rebased once more. @kfcampbell can you review/merge?

@chiradeepsai I'm just an outside contributor without the power to merge. :(

@silabs-DylanW
Copy link

This has been lingering for way too long, it would be great to understand what exactly is the reason not to include this if the provider maintainers are not merging it in for a particular reason.

@pascal-hofmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

@silabs-DylanW In a different project I once had a patch rejected after waiting 12 1/2 years. 😅

pascal-hofmann and others added 2 commits November 14, 2025 11:44
- Add allow_forking schema field (optional, no default)
- Implement conditional logic to only set allow_forking for non-public repos
- Add conditional read to only store allow_forking in state for non-public repos
- Add comprehensive acceptance tests with skipUnlessMode helper
- Update existing repository tests to include allow_forking

Fixes integrations#353
@pascal-hofmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

pascal-hofmann commented Nov 14, 2025

@pmartindev Looking at the history of allow_forking in the provider, I guess we should add a test for organizations with forking disabled. 🤔 What do you think?

See #1136.

Converting to draft for now.

@pascal-hofmann pascal-hofmann marked this pull request as draft November 14, 2025 10:51
@deiga
Copy link
Contributor

deiga commented Nov 29, 2025

Hey @pascal-hofmann 👋

Thank you very much for your contribution!
And I'm sorry that you've had to wait so long to get this merged.

We've recently added more maintainers to the project and hope to get everything merged ☺️

Now, I don't have merge permissions, but I'll be coordinating some of the efforts.

Would you be available to rebase and resolve conflicts, yet again 😬?

I also wonder if this needs any additional tests or changes for enterprises that disallow forking?

@pascal-hofmann
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @deiga ,
I rebased and started adding more tests two weeks ago, but then had no time to finish and push. I‘ll (hopefully) have a look at this next week.

Cheers,
Pascal

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from 🏗 In progress to ✅ Done in 🧰 Octokit Active Jan 7, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Features] less Allow forking avariable for private repository.