fix: indentation in examples for git-open-pr.md

[jessebot]

All pull requests must reference an existing issue with no blocking labels.
PRs that do not meet this requirement will be automatically closed. See the
Contributor Guide for details.

Issue Reference

Closes #6272

Description

Fixes indentation in the git-open-pr docs.

Checklist

• The PR is linked to an existing issue.
• The linked issue has no blocking labels (kind/proposal,
  needs discussion, needs research, maintainer only, area/security,
  size/large, size/x-large, size/xx-large).
• I have added or updated tests as appropriate.
• I have added or updated documentation as appropriate.

AI Use Disclosure

Select one:

• This PR was written by a human without AI assistance.
• This PR was written by a human with AI assistance. A human has reviewed every line prior to opening the PR.
• This PR was written by an AI with human supervision. A human has reviewed every line prior to opening the PR.
• This PR was written entirely by AI. No human has reviewed this prior to opening the PR.

Sign-Off

• All commits are signed off (git commit -s) (required)
• All commits are cryptographically signed (git commit -S) (encouraged)

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for docs-kargo-io ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	e413949
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/docs-kargo-io/deploys/6a04aefd0b6a0b00077ad039
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-6273.docs.kargo.io
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 57.96%. Comparing base (b4d730d) to head (e413949).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #6273      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   57.92%   57.96%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         496      496              
  Lines       41554    41599      +45     
==========================================
+ Hits        24072    24113      +41     
- Misses      16030    16032       +2     
- Partials     1452     1454       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[krancour]

I am not supportive of this change. It wasn't wrong to begin with. There was simply an unstated assumption that the reader understood this snippet to have been extracted from a Stage's spec.promotionTemplate and not from a PromotionTask's or ClusterPromotionTask's spec.steps. The proposed change is only replacing one unstated assumption with a different unstated assumption. A better, (albeit much larger) fix would be to find all the examples throughout the docs where this unstated assumption exists and adjust those examples accordingly. i.e., this example becomes something like this:

steps:
apiVersion: kargo.akuity.io/v1alpha1
kind: Stage
# ...
spec:
  # ...
  promotionTemplate:
    # Clone, prepare the contents of ./out, commit, etc...
    - uses: git-push
      as: push
      config:
        path: ./out
        generateTargetBranch: true
    - uses: git-open-pr
      as: open-pr
      config:
        repoURL: https://github.com/example/repo.git
        sourceBranch: ${{ outputs.push.branch }}
        targetBranch: stage/${{ ctx.stage }}
   # Wait for the PR to be merged or closed...

[jessebot]

Can we instead mention that tidbit somewhere? This was confusing for me and I lost an hour at work trying to figure out why it didn't work.

[jessebot]

In the meantime, I've reverted this to only be the indentation change.

[krancour]

Can we instead mention that tidbit somewhere?

If you're proposing to mention it in one centralized place, I don't see any way that won't be overlooked.

It could be mentioned in plain English along with each example that might be prone to this confusion (any one that uses output from a previous step). That may end up being annoyingly repetitive, which would make establishing the context in the YAML as I proposed more attractive. Honestly, though, I worry even then could be overlooked.

Another option could be a comment anywhere output is used that says something like "# Or use task.outputs if using a (Cluster)PromotionTask."

In the meantime, I've reverted this to only be the indentation change.

Happy to merge this as-is.

[krancour]

Created #6275 to track correction of the unstated assumption.

[akuitybot]

Successfully created backport PR for release-1.10:

• chore(backport release-1.10): fix: indentation in examples for git-open-pr.md  #6283