fix: use GITHUB_TOKEN env if available #427
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
theoludwig
changed the title
mstruebing
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2025
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 6.1.1 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes this PR introduce?
This explicitly passes a
process.env.GITHUB_TOKENtonew Octokit()so that requests via CI can be authenticated and avoid rate limiting.I tried seeing if there was a way to get around this via octokit, but it seems like the library requires library clients to specify the authentication method explicitly due to the many different ways that the GitHub API can be authenticated with. https://github.com/octokit/authentication-strategies.js/?tab=readme-ov-file#official-authentication-strategies
List any relevant issue numbers
#425 (comment)
Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?