Same code builds successfully on forked repo while fails on main repo

I’m facing a weird issue. The same code passes all tests on forked account while fails to build on the main account.
Here’s recent builds:

There’s a weird error which doesn’t occur on the forked repo build:

$ Rscript -e 'deps <- remotes::dev_package_deps(dependencies = NA);remotes::install_deps(dependencies = TRUE);if (!all(deps$package %in% installed.packages())) { message("missing: ", paste(setdiff(deps$package, installed.packages()), collapse=", ")); q(status = 1, save = "no")}'
Error in utils::download.file(url, path, method = method, quiet = quiet,  : 
  cannot open URL ''
Calls: <Anonymous> ... github_DESCRIPTION -> download -> base_download -> base_download_headers
Execution halted

@jeroen and @jimhester please let me know if I’m missing anything!

The only difference between forks is –

  • environment variables from repository settings
  • secret variables and other encrypted values from .travis.yml (a fork cannot access secret values encrypted for the main repo)

Seeing that the error is

And the difference is the GITHUB_PAT secret variable (note that in the main repo build, the variable from repo is overridden with the variable from .travis.yml), I reckon the erroring build’s token has insufficient access, or is revoked, or maybe hitting a request limit.

Can’t say anything more without seeing more information about the error (e.g. the server’s response).

GITHUB_PAT variable is being used to allow the creation of gist. It’s not involved in any other operation.
I’m unable to think of a way it can cause this error.

Then you must be hitting API limits. There are many Github API requests coming from Travis IPs, you know – so you’d better authenticate yours!

Can you show more information about the error – ideally, the server’s response? As I said, can’t say anything more concrete without it.

That might be the case!
Though from where can I grab the details you’re looking for?
Pardon me if I ask for anything obvious. I’m new to these CI things.

You were right @native-api, It was related to the API token.
Thank you so mcuh.