The chart says that we likely want to use GitHub App. It doesn't matter which way go, you always end up with GitHub App because of "Access everything? No".

Also, they say this, in the document

> Using OAuth Apps
>     - An OAuth App should always act as the authenticated GitHub user, across all of GitHub
>     - Don't build an OAuth App if you want your application to act on a single repository. With the repo OAuth scope, OAuth apps can act on all of the authenticated user's repositories.

I have a question about a user-friendliness of these two - GitHub App vs OAuth App. I am reading through tons of docs, but can't find the answer anywhere. Do I understand it right, that in case of GitHub App, every user will need to create his own app to get a new access token and put that into Copr, but in case of OAuth app, *we* will create an application, put it somehow into and then a user will just one-click to allow it and then everything will automagically work?

In such case, OAuth apps may be worth it even though the permission restriction possibilities are limited (


On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Pavel Raiskup <> wrote:
On Wednesday, March 21, 2018 12:36:25 PM CET Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 21.3.2018 v 12:28 Pavel Raiskup napsal(a):
> >     4. store **only** the **app** credentials into copr
> Yes. Only one app for all projects and all githubs and individual permission
> for each specific Github is granted via OAuth.

GitHub OAuth:

    pros: users don't have to create custom app (a few clicks anyway)
    cons: that app has complete access to the repo, even push

GitHub App:

    pros: users can grant the app to e.g. only set the "CI flags" in PR
    cons: users have to create the custom app in web-ui

To me, we should support both ways (oauth for convenience of users)..  but
I voted for non-OAuth as that's the only option I would _personaly_


copr-devel mailing list --
To unsubscribe send an email to