Enable the use of different actors in rule sets

[morfien101]

This PR attempts to resolve an issue where the provider is not able to create bypass rules that don't use the explicit values set in this provider. The provider itself is out of date. There is no need for the provider to do the check as the API and helps will do the checks for us.

Resolves #2254

---

Before the change?

Users would not be able to make a bypass rule that uses something like a DeployKey

  bypass_actors {
    actor_type  = "DeployKey"
    bypass_mode = "always"
  }

After the change?

Users can make any bypass rule that is accepted by the API

Pull request checklist

• Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
• Docs have been reviewed and added / updated if needed (for bug fixes / features)

Does this introduce a breaking change?

No breaking changes. I expect it to be fully backwards compatible with the current config in the wild.

See it working here

[morfien101]

@kfcampbell Any chance you can have a look at this please. We would like to start making use of it but having to keep a separate copy of the provider is a pain.
Tagging you since you reviewed the previous attempt for this feature.

[augustasvilc]

Suggested change

	ValidateFunc: validation.StringInSlice([]string{"RepositoryRole", "Team", "Integration", "OrganizationAdmin"}, false),
	ValidateFunc: validation.StringInSlice([]string{"RepositoryRole", "Team", "Integration", "OrganizationAdmin", "DeployKey"}, false),

[joshdk]

It would be very nice to get this PR updated and merged :)

[dsdeboer]

It would be very nice to get this PR updated and merged :)

@morfien101 should I help you out?

[languitar]

I've taken the liberty to update this in #2726

[magusd]

ship it!

[nickfloyd]

@morfien101 Thank you for the work here. I'll be closing this one in favor of the work done here. Let me know if you think your patch still should be applied, but the PRs are really similar.

[morfien101]

I'm ok with either. Just happy it's coming :)