Add owner attribute for repository resource

[tdabasinskas]

An attempt to fix #1702.

The lack of ability to specify owner for an individual repository resource makes this provider pretty much unusable in a GHES environment containing over 300 organizations – having a separate provider for every single organization is probably not a great idea.

I'm not sure my solution is ideal – the current code is quite biased on the owner being resolved automatically, so it's a bit challenging to add support for an explicit owner without introducing a breaking change.

I've tested this quite extensively manually – seems to be working as expected. If someone could help with adding some tests to confirm this, I would appreciate. Also, these changes should be applied to all repository_ resources, but prior to doing that, I wanted to get some feedback.

---

Before the change?

• repository resource uses owner specified at the provider level.

After the change?

• repository resource supports an optional owner argument.
• If the argument is provided, the resource is managed under that specific owner.
• If the argument is not provided, the owner defined at the provider level is used.

Pull request checklist

• [ ] Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
• [X] Docs have been reviewed and added / updated if needed (for bug fixes / features)

Does this introduce a breaking change?

Please see our docs on breaking changes to help!

• [ ] Yes
• [X] No

---

[kfcampbell]

This seems like a good approach to the change to me, though I also feel somewhat uncomfortable without integration tests.

[nickfloyd]

Hey @tdabasinskas, just a quick follow up. Is this something that you are interested in wrapping up? I think the remaining items are:

• @kfcampbell left a quick suggestion on the docs
• Some integration tests if you get the chance

Thanks again for making things better for the community here! ❤️

[tdabasinskas]

Hi @nickfloyd,

Sorry for dropping a ball on this.

I've updated the docs as per @kfcampbell proposal. However, I'm not sure when I could do the integration tests, and, more importantly, add this to all the rest of repository-related resources. Being able to set owner only for repository resource but still requiring dedicated providers for all other resources, is not ideal 😕

[kfcampbell]

Being able to set owner only for repository resource but still requiring dedicated providers for all other resources, is not ideal 😕

I definitely agree with this take, and this is something the provider can stand to do a lot better on. We'd definitely be receptive to anybody wanting to continue this work.

[avidspartan1]

Hey every, just a heads up - I merged this branch into my own and am continuing this work there. Feedback welcome!