Use an existing token even if the PR is from a fork

[leofeyer]

This fixes codecov/feedback#358 and #1457 and would greatly improve the situation for everyone using Codecov until codecov/engineering-team#1574 has been solved and released.

What‘s the problem?

Even if the fork provides a Codecov token, it is ignored and tokenless uploading is used.

How das this PR fix it?

It adjusts the logic so that an existing token is always used, regardless of whether the PR originates from a fork or not.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 92.92%. Comparing base (ccf7a1f) to head (f95915c).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1471      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.63%   92.92%   +1.28%     
==========================================
  Files           4        4              
  Lines         311      311              
  Branches       84       85       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits          285      289       +4     
+ Misses         24       20       -4     
  Partials        2        2              

Flag	Coverage Δ
demo	92.92% <100.00%> (+1.28%)	⬆️
macos-latest	92.92% <100.00%> (+1.28%)	⬆️
script	92.92% <100.00%> (+1.28%)	⬆️
ubuntu-latest	92.92% <100.00%> (+1.28%)	⬆️
version	92.92% <100.00%> (+1.28%)	⬆️
windows-latest	92.92% <100.00%> (+1.28%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

[thomasrockhu-codecov]

@leofeyer I'm going to sit on this this week as we are making some major changes to tokenless for forks. I want to check that those pathways work first, and then tackle the case where if a token is given from a fork, oidc or not, it will be given priority. That case will need to be handled in codecov-api as well.

Looks great, will merge in and make a deploy today