feat: add DeployKey to bypass_actors in github_organization_ruleset and github_repository_ruleset

[megamih]

Resolves #2254

---

Before the change?

• Terraform GitHub provider lacks support for Deploy keys.

resource "github_organization_ruleset" "test" {
	name        = "test-%s"
	target      = "branch"
	enforcement = "active"

	conditions {
		ref_name {
			include = ["~ALL"]
			exclude = []
		}
	}

	bypass_actors {
		actor_id    = 0
		actor_type  = "DeployKey"
		bypass_mode = "always"
	}

	rules {
		creation = true

		update = true

		deletion                = true
		required_linear_history = true

		required_signatures = false

		pull_request {
			required_approving_review_count   = 2
			required_review_thread_resolution = true
			require_code_owner_review         = true
			dismiss_stale_reviews_on_push     = true
			require_last_push_approval        = true
		}

		required_status_checks {

			required_check {
				context = "ci"
			}

			strict_required_status_checks_policy = true
		}

		branch_name_pattern {
			name     = "test"
			negate   = false
			operator = "starts_with"
			pattern  = "test"
		}

		non_fast_forward = true
	}
}

returns an error

│ Error: expected bypass_actors.0.actor_type to be one of [RepositoryRole Team Integration OrganizationAdmin], got DeployKey

After the change?

• Terraform GitHub provider supports Deploy keys for bypass access:

Terraform used the selected providers to generate the following execution plan. Resource actions are indicated with the following symbols:
  + create

Terraform will perform the following actions:

  # github_organization_ruleset.test will be created
  + resource "github_organization_ruleset" "test" {
  ...
      + bypass_actors {
          + actor_id    = 0
          + actor_type  = "DeployKey"
          + bypass_mode = "always"
        }
  ...
    }

Plan: 1 to add, 0 to change, 0 to destroy.

Pull request checklist

• Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
• 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
• No

---

[kfcampbell]

Unfortunately I can't accept this since it modifies a vendored file, and would be overwritten by any future update to the dependency. Perhaps it could be updated upstream first?

[milpog]

I would be interested in having this feature added to provider ❤️

Unfortunately I can't accept this since it modifies a vendored file, and would be overwritten by any future update to the dependency. Perhaps it could be updated upstream first?

@kfcampbell I see it has been added in recent version of that go library https://github.com/google/go-github/blob/v64.0.0/github/repos_rules.go#L15-L21

@megamih maybe you could update your PR? Thanks!

[rsmets]

Bummed this has not been added to the provider yet.

[stevehipwell]

@megamih are you planning on continuing to work on this? If not I can add the changes to one of my PRs.

[erihanse]

We need this as well. What will require to get this in?

[benjy44]

Is this still being worked on?
It would be really nice to have!

[nickfloyd]

@megamih Thank you for the work here. I'll be closing this one in favor of the work done #2726. Let me know if you think your patch still should be applied, but the PRs are really similar.