Fix documentation of repository_visibility field in OIDC token

yogeshlonkar commented 2 years ago

Code of Conduct

[X] I have read and agree to the GitHub Docs project's Code of Conduct

What article on docs.github.com is affected?

https://docs.github.com/en/actions/deployment/security-hardening-your-deployments/about-security-hardening-with-openid-connect#understanding-the-oidc-token

What part(s) of the article would you like to see updated?

Give as much detail as you can to help us understand the change you want to see.

In "Understanding the OIDC token" section example as well as field details contains wrong field name for repository visibility. The field repo_visibility should be repository_visibility

Why should the docs be changed? What use cases does it support?

I spent more than couple of hour by referencing wrong field from from documentation. After debugging OIDC token I found the actual field name is different. This field is useful to configuring Workload identity federation with GCP and STS conditions in AWS to prevent from giving access to public repositories

What is the expected outcome?

Providing correct information in documentation
Saving development time

Additional information

Wrong references in example

Wrong references in field details

Actual JWT fields

welcome[bot] commented 2 years ago

Thanks for opening this issue. A GitHub docs team member should be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, please check out the contributing guidelines.

cmwilson21 commented 2 years ago

@yogeshlonkar Thanks for opening an issue! I see that you made a PR as well, but it's for a file in which we don't usually accept changes, so our bot closed it out. 💛

I will get this issue triaged for review, and it will be fixed internally if approved.

Thank you for your interest in improving GitHub Docs! :sparkling_heart:

github-actions[bot] commented 2 years ago

Thanks for opening an issue! We've triaged this issue for technical review by a subject matter expert :eyes:

martin389 commented 2 years ago

Hi @yogeshlonkar, thanks for letting us know. I've now updated the article in an internal PR 👍

github / docs