github: Add forking functionality from krel release-notes

[justaugustus]

The ability to create forks was reused in krel promote-images,
which is now being moved into sigs.k8s.io/promo-tools as
kpromo pr: kubernetes-sigs/promo-tools#458

Given the functionality has proven to be useful in multiple places,
we'll move it here so it can be leveraged for other tools.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Augustus [email protected]

/assign @puerco @xmudrii @Verolop
cc: @kubernetes-sigs/release-engineering

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: justaugustus

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [justaugustus]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[puerco]

Thinking a little bit about these functions that relate to forking, much of the code relies on github apis, but if you think about it the functions are more git specific. For example, things like github.BranchExists() are in essence GitHub API laziness for looking into the git ls-remote output 🤔 WDYT?

[puerco]

The downside of course is that we would have to implement some of the github code in git which is in practice pointless as we already have the functionality.

[justaugustus]

Thinking a little bit about these functions that relate to forking, much of the code relies on github apis, but if you think about it the functions are more git specific. For example, things like github.BranchExists() are in essence GitHub API laziness for looking into the git ls-remote output 🤔 WDYT?

The downside of course is that we would have to implement some of the github code in git which is in practice pointless as we already have the functionality.

@puerco -- Hmmm, I think we should defer that discussion til when we tackle this issue: #4

[puerco]

we should defer that discussion til when we tackle this issue: #4

Hehe I was precisely writing that :) let's get them to support the other PRs and then consider building those two functions in pure git.
/lgtm

BTW: From recent experiences from work I'm starting to have second thoughts about #4

[justaugustus]

we should defer that discussion til when we tackle this issue: #4

Hehe I was precisely writing that :) let's get them to support the other PRs and then consider building those two functions in pure git.

BTW: From recent experiences from work I'm starting to have second thoughts about #4

Hehe, I know what you mean about #4.
Cross-linking the convos for history: #4 (comment)