Running Octoherd scripts in the browser #31
Replies: 3 comments 9 replies
-
|
This is super cool! https://github.com/marketplace/repo-meister givest me a 404, I guess it's not approved yet? It seems that you created an OAuth App? Why not a GitHub App? it would give more control with the installs, with granular per-repository access.
what did you need to rewrite?
I wanted to create a browser-based runners since the beginning of @octoherd, so that is super cool to see! Do you plan to open source the project? No pressure, just curious. Besides running the scripts, it would also be nice to provide visualizations for the output logs. Our idea is that in future a script could define a list of "tasks" that it does (such as "check if starred", "star", "unstar") and then log out each time the task is performed. That way the runner can log out a summary at the end. The web runner could show all of the logs with options to filter theme out by level, or using some kind of syntax such as Anyway, there is no lack of ideas 🤣 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Oops, I see the Marketplace listing is not published yet. Is the coarse OAuth permission scheme holding you back from installing the tool? I'm thinking about rewriting it to a GitHub App before publishing it (for real) on the Marketplace.
In the first version all the "actions" were implemented in Java. Then I started thinking about a Python framework to facilitate 3rd party actions and then I bumped into Octoherd 😄 Now all actions are public Octoherd scripts.
Yes, planning to open source and setup a paid Marketplace plan for private organization repositories. I have some experience with that from developing https://github.com/robvanderleek/create-issue-branch
Currently the tool runs an Octoherd script in isolation for a single repo. It shows the console output of that run. You can select multiple repos to run scripts for a larger portfolio in one go. I spent some time investigating if GitHub Actions could be used to run the scripts (so the scripts run in an isolated environment under the user/org GH account). Unfortunately GH Actions does not really support one-off type of workflows and the GH token in Actions has a very limited scope (it can't be used to admin repo settings).
Thanks a lot for all the feedback so far 👍 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
GitHub apps also have an OAuth flow. The OAuth flow creates what GitHub is calling "user-to-server Tokens". With these tokens, the app can act on behalf of the authorized user. The advantage to OAuth Apps is that the access is limited to the repositories the app is installed on.
Yes. The OAuth permission would give account-wide read/write access to both public and private repositories, I cannot grant the app these permissions, unfortunately.
sounds like a very good plan :) I will keep you posted should we start working on a website for octoherd, I'm sure there will be an overlap, but I'm also sure there will be plenty of added value your app could provide to distinguish itself.
Actions can pretty do pretty much anything, it all depends on the token is give it. I use GitHub App credentials a lot in Actions to get around the limit of I do want to create an Octoherd action as well at some point, but don't have any plans to work on it anytime soon, it's not a priority. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I've rewritten the app from an OAuth integration to a GitHub App: https://repomeister.com/ Due to the diverse nature of Octoherd scripts (they can be used to automate many different things 🤖) I'm still struggling a bit with the permission configuration:
Could you give the GitHub App a try? Of course I understand if you are not interested in beta-testing or simply too busy.
Actions have the benefit that the Octoherd script runs in a safe environment under full control of the user/org. However, I also want to keep a low-complexity user experience. The current workflow is 1. Choose script, 2. Choose repo, 3. Run. Creating an Action workflow or having the user set a PAT is something I would like to avoid (but maybe these steps can be automated, just not sure how). |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hey @robvanderleek ! Sorry for arriving late to this discussion. First of all, congratulations and thanks for all the work you have done with this. I love it! I would like to help you if you think I can add value here. What would you like me to try? Please, let me know :) I will take a look into https://github.com/robvanderleek/create-issue-branch too 😎 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hi @oscard0m 👋 Currently repomeister.com implements the first iteration of a workflow (Choose script, Choose repo, Run) that sounds straightforward to me (n = 1) but I really wonder what both script users and script maintainers think of it. Some things I currently struggle with:
You can also create issues for specific problems you bump into. Thanks for helping out! Also, feel free to ask questions about the direction of the project (open-sourcing, marketplace, etc.) here or contact me directly (links in bio). |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hey @robvanderleek! I had the chance to play a little bit on repomeister.com. I used the I see a lot of potential on the platform. Monetizing for private organization repositories is a very interesting model. Here are my thoughts on your questions:
In my case, I trust Octoherd scripts because:
With a non-open source web/backend requiring users to authenticate, I'm not sure what will be the adoption. Especially if we take into consideration
As a user, it would be nice if:
I don't know how to do this. Let's open a discussion in Octoherd to talk about it!
I think it's a good start. At some point, it could be interesting to auto-maintain this. Octoherd suggests script creators create their scripts under a repo with the label
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hi @oscard0m 👋 Sorry for the delay, had a couple of offline days 🏖️
I'm planning to open source RepoMeister at some point but I don't like the app to require so many permissions either.
Regarding permissions per script: I like it a lot, but how? If possible I'd like to stay away from API tokens as I don't want to store them in the platform and want to keep the UX straightforward.
Done! #32
Agree, I think this overlaps with this issue in the awesome Octoherd scripts repo, let's see where that leads 😄 KR, Rob |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
offline days are great, no need to say sorry :)
👏 8000 🥳
If I'm not wrong, the user needs to insert a code manually: https://docs.github.com/en/developers/apps/building-oauth-apps/authorizing-oauth-apps#step-2-prompt-the-user-to-enter-the-user-code-in-a-browser Octoherd works like that when you don't provide any token.
The cool thing about this is that it's something temporal so each execution will require a new authentication. It's good for security reasons but annoying to users having to authenticate with a device all the time. Maybe offering both options?
Since the same app is used to run different scripts (and each script will have its own subset of permissions), I don't know how we could do this).
I'm not sure how we could do this 😞 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I've create https://repomeister.com, a tool to run Octoherd scripts in the browser.
It's on the GitHub Marketplace and free to use for all personal repositories and public organization repositories. The current version is an "Octoherd" rewrite (I used custom action code before). The code is still hot from the oven so there might be some 🐛 here and there.
Very interested in all your feedback/questions/feature requests! Also tell me if you don't like it or you would never use such a tool.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions