Making access to reusable workflows clearer

[osarobo]

Why:

Making access to reusable workflows clearer as evident in customer's confusion in the following tickets(amongst others):
ZD_2783484
ZD_2755805

Closes:

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

Added the following for clarity:

In summary, the ability to access called workflow by the caller workflow is determined by the repository's visibility access as shown in the table below.

Caller repository	Accessible called workflow repositories
private	private, internal, and public
internal	internal, and public
public	public

In addition, please note that the Actions permissions on the caller's repository Actions settings page must be set to allow the use of actions and reusable workflows.

With the exception of a public repository, also note that the Access policy on the called workflow's repository Actions settings page must be explicitly configured to allow access from repositories in the organization or repositories in the enterprise.

Check off the following:

• I have reviewed my changes in staging, available via the View deployment link in this PR's timeline (this link will be available after opening the PR).

  • For content changes, you will also see an automatically generated comment with links directly to pages you've modified. The comment won't appear if your PR only edits files in the data directory.

• For content changes, I have completed the self-review checklist.

[github-actions]

Automatically generated comment ℹ️

This comment is automatically generated and will be overwritten every time changes are committed to this branch.

The table contains an overview of files in the content directory that have been changed in this pull request. It's provided to make it easy to review your changes on the staging site. Please note that changes to the data directory will not show up in this table.

---

Content directory changes

You may find it useful to copy this table into the pull request summary. There you can edit it to share links to important articles or changes and to give a high-level overview of how the changes in your pull request support the overall goals of the pull request.

Source	Preview	Production	What Changed
actions/using-workflows/reusing-workflows.md	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.13 3.12 3.11 3.10 3.9	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.13 3.12 3.11 3.10 3.9

---

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

[nguyenalex836]

@osarobo Hello! 👋 I'll get this triaged for review ✨ In the future, would you mind opening your PRs in the docs-content repo? That is the repo intended for Hubber PRs 💛 thank you!

[osarobo]

@osarobo Hello! 👋 I'll get this triaged for review ✨ In the future, would you mind opening your PRs in the docs-content repo? That is the repo intended for Hubber PRs 💛 thank you!

@nguyenalex836 Thank you for letting me know! I sure will opening your PRs in the docs-content repo in the future. I missed that in this case. Thanks for pointing that out.

[nguyenalex836]

@nguyenalex836 Thank you for letting me know! I sure will opening your PRs in the docs-content repo in the future. I missed that in this case. Thanks for pointing that out.

No problem at all! 💛😸

[hubwriter]

Just to clarify: Hubbers should raise docs issues in the docs-content repo and PRs in the docs-internal repo.

[hubwriter]

Many thanks @osarobo - I've made a few changes just for our Docs style and to condition mention of internal repos out of the Free/Pro/Team docs.

I'll get this merged. Thanks again for raising this PR. 🙇

[github-actions]

Thanks very much for contributing! Your pull request has been merged 🎉 You should see your changes appear on the site in approximately 24 hours. If you're looking for your next contribution, check out our help wanted issues ⚡

[osarobo]

Many thanks @osarobo - I've made a few changes just for our Docs style and to condition mention of internal repos out of the Free/Pro/Team docs.

I'll get this merged. Thanks again for raising this PR. 🙇

@hubwriter Thank you for this note. When I was reviewing all of the best ways to make points on reusable workflows clearer for our customers, I did see tha internal repository was mention in the Free/Pro/Team docs of About GitHub Actions access to private repositories. It got me confused, because from my support experience internal repositories aren't available to Free/Pro/Team. Please, correct me if I am wrong. Is that similar to what you mean here? I don't think I was seeing such mentions of internal repositories on Free/Pro/Team docs until recently.

Sample statement from the linked document:

Actions and reusable workflows stored in internal repositories cannot be used in public repositories and actions and reusable workflows stored in private repositories cannot be used in public or internal repositories.