I implemented the GitHub Actions Secrets API calls within octokit.net splitting the clients into repository and organization secrets clients (link).

I also created an intermediate client class for repository and organization actions that sit off of the RepositoryClient and OrganizationClient respectively to enable future implementation of actions APIs.

Codecov Report

Merging #2221 (52ce379) into main (15887d9) will decrease coverage by 0.01%. The diff coverage is 76.47%.

:exclamation: Current head 52ce379 differs from pull request most recent head c370d1a. Consider uploading reports for the commit c370d1a to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2221      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   65.99%   65.97%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         554      553       -1     
  Lines       14519    14435      -84     
  Branches      857      844      -13     
==========================================
- Hits         9582     9524      -58     
+ Misses       4779     4752      -27     
- Partials      158      159       +1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...t.Reactive/Clients/ObservableRepositoriesClient.cs	68.38% <50.00%> (+2.54%)	:arrow_up:
Octokit/Clients/OrganizationsClient.cs	89.28% <50.00%> (ø)
Octokit/Helpers/ApiUrls.cs	97.52% <80.00%> (-0.02%)	:arrow_down:
....Reactive/Clients/ObservableOrganizationsClient.cs	73.33% <100.00%> (ø)
Octokit/Clients/RepositoriesClient.cs	95.05% <100.00%> (-0.62%)	:arrow_down:
Octokit/Models/Request/NewDeployment.cs	23.07% <0.00%> (-15.39%)	:arrow_down:
Octokit/Models/Response/PullRequestCommit.cs	50.00% <0.00%> (-12.50%)	:arrow_down:
Octokit/Models/Response/Commit.cs	11.11% <0.00%> (-5.56%)	:arrow_down:
Octokit/Models/Response/Verification.cs	0.00% <0.00%> (-5.56%)	:arrow_down:
...ctokit/Models/Request/SearchRepositoriesRequest.cs	71.96% <0.00%> (-5.03%)	:arrow_down:
... and 20 more

https://github.com/octokit/octokit.net/pull/2221#discussion_r469325554

I'll add a commit after I finish this initial review updating all the developer.github.com and help.github.com links I find in these changes

Okay so this is actually taking a lot longer than I thought it would. The process is:

1. If file has developer.github.com or help.github.com links, go to that page and follow the redirect message at the top
2. Copy/paste the new redirect URL (may need to re-do the anchor link) into the file and commit

I've done quite a few, @mptolly-takeda please continue to look for them. If you have your branch local (since it's a fork), it may be easier to find/replace.

@IAmHughes I updated the documentation links within the 4 clients that I created

@mptolly-takeda @IAmHughes thanks for being patient with me while I try and make time to review this. This is looking pretty good!

Looking through the changes, I think the only real topic worth unpacking is the integration tests. For the sake of simplicity, let's not stress about granularity of covering everything . Let's instead focus on testing scenarios in a way that we can easily setup and teardown, without depending on the test account being in a certain state.

Hey, wanted to see if there was any movement here?

I was looking for this functionality so I could deploy temporary AWS credendials GitHub org/repo secrets and was wondering where it was. It would be great if this awesome PR could get landed.

:shipit:

@shiftkey any timeline for merging this in?

@mptolly-takeda I have to apologize. I jumped the gun on trying to resolve a merge conflict on this and it ended up inadvertently adding an unsupported dep to the integration tests project. I did it through the GH interface and I cannot revert it on your branch because I do not have access. I'd be glad to help get this in a place where we could merge it in - this is such a good chance.

If possible, would you mind reverting the commit I did through the interface and resolving the merge conflict so that we can try to get your changeset merged into main? Thank you again for the changes and apologies for the trouble here.

@mptolly-takeda I'd like to do a friendly bump here. Is this something you have an interest in picking back up? If not, I could branch off of b69eba1 and submit a similar PR.

Closing in favor of #2598.