Set explicit workflow permissions#13746
Conversation
|
👋 Hello @glenn-jocher, thank you for submitting a
For more guidance, please refer to our Contributing Guide. Don't hesitate to leave a comment if you have any questions. Thank you for contributing to Ultralytics! 🚀 |
UltralyticsAssistant
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🔍 PR Review
Made with ❤️ by Ultralytics Actions
PR looks clean. The permission changes are consistent with least-privilege intent, and the workflow-level move in stale.yml is behaviorally equivalent here since the workflow has a single job. I did not find any actionable issues in the shown diff.
|
🎉 Thanks for merging this, @glenn-jocher! This is a great refinement to the GitHub Actions setup—clearer permissions, better security hygiene, and more reliable automation all in one pass. As Benjamin Franklin put it, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” That fits this PR perfectly: small, intentional permission updates now help prevent CI confusion and workflow issues later. Really appreciate the thoughtful cleanup and consistency improvements here 🔐⚙️ |
Summary
contents: writepermission required byupdate_branch()CodeQL alerts
Addresses the open
actions/missing-workflow-permissionsalerts onmaster:Validation
yaml.safe_load()git diff --check🛠️ PR Summary
Made with ❤️ by Ultralytics Actions
🌟 Summary
🔐 This PR updates GitHub Actions workflow permissions to better match what each automation job actually needs, improving clarity, reliability, and security.
📊 Key Changes
contents: readpermissions in:.github/workflows/docker.yml.github/workflows/links.yml.github/workflows/merge-main-into-prs.yml:contents: read→contents: writepull-requests: write.github/workflows/stale.ymlfrom the job level to the workflow level:issues: writepull-requests: write🎯 Purpose & Impact
maininto open PRs.