enhance(avoiding-duplication): secrets comparison accuracy

[Malix-Labs]

Why:

The secret comparison between reusable workflows and composite actions was inaccurate

What's being changed (if available, include any code snippets, screenshots, or gifs):

Enhancing the accuracy of the secret comparison between reusable workflows and composite actions

Check off the following:

• A subject matter expert (SME) has reviewed the technical accuracy of the content in this PR. In most cases, the author can be the SME. Open source contributions may require an SME review from GitHub staff.
• The changes in this PR meet the docs fundamentals that are required for all content.
• All CI checks are passing and the changes look good in the review environment.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR improves the accuracy of the secret comparison between reusable workflows and composite actions.

• Updated the table entry for secrets to reflect that secrets must be passed explicitly as named secrets for reusable workflows and as inputs for composite actions.

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

content/actions/concepts/workflows-and-actions/avoiding-duplication.md:47

• [nitpick] Ensure that the updated language for secret handling remains consistent with the broader documentation style and guidelines for describing secret passing methods.

| Secrets must be passed as explicit named secrets | Secrets must be passed as inputs from the calling workflow |

[github-actions]

How to review these changes 👓

Thank you for your contribution. To review these changes, choose one of the following options:

• Spin up a codespace
• Set up a local development environment

A Hubber will need to deploy your changes internally to review.

Table of review links

Note: Please update the URL for your staging server or codespace.

The table shows the files in the content directory that were changed in this pull request. This helps you review your changes on a staging server. Changes to the data directory are not included in this table.

Source	Review	Production	What Changed
actions/concepts/workflows-and-actions/reusing-workflow-configurations.md	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.18 3.17 3.16 3.15 3.14	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.18 3.17 3.16 3.15 3.14

Key: fpt: Free, Pro, Team; ghec: GitHub Enterprise Cloud; ghes: GitHub Enterprise Server

🤖 This comment is automatically generated.

[Sharra-writes]

I'll look into this one, too!

[github-actions]

A stale label has been added to this pull request because it has been open 30 days with no activity. If you think this pull request should remain open, please add a new comment.

[github-actions]

A stale label has been added to this pull request because it has been open 30 days with no activity. If you think this pull request should remain open, please add a new comment.

[github-actions]

A stale label has been added to this pull request because it has been open 30 days with no activity. If you think this pull request should remain open, please add a new comment.

[Malix-Labs]

@Sharra-writes

[Sharra-writes]

@Malix-Labs Someone from the Actions team is supposed to be looking into this and several other things, and I've poked them recently, so I'll let you know when I hear something. Sorry for the wait and thanks for being so patient.

[Sharra-writes]

@Malix-Labs The Actions teams doesn't want to make this exact change. They're not sure things are working as intended and want to look into it internally, so they've rejected this PR. Sorry, I know that was a long wait to get an answer you don't want, but at least someone is looking at it.

[Malix-Labs]

Well, something must at least be done because the docs are just incorrect wrong as they currently are (it has actually been sent to us from a big client that was confused by this)

The sentence I wrote are for sure really not the best, but i'm sure the actions team could come up with a better fix instead!

Can you notify them please, @Sharra-writes?

[Sharra-writes]

@Malix-Labs I'll let them know. I am really sorry about this, and I wish they had given me more details or some sort of compromise, but I have to defer to their team on these issues regardless of whether I'm satisfied.