You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
A repo can use many secrets, some of which may have non-obvious origins. I find it would be useful to be able to add notes to a secret, which could contain any information that the user deems helpful for them. An example use case would be:
secret_name: SOME_API_TOKEN
secret_value: <super_secret_value>
description: "Used by process xxx. Expiry date: ddmmyy, renew by going to ..., include API scope blablabla"
Suggested solution
This could be a simple plain text field, visible to anyone who has access to create/modify secrets, along with the secret name. The aim is to provide hints/document the secret.
I noticed that gitlab recently added this to their CI, which I find extremely helpful.
In a perfect world, secrets would be generated in code, with proper documentation, but it's not always possible in tiny projects.
Alternative
No response
Additional context
No response
Validations
Checked that the feature isn't part of the next version already [https://woodpecker-ci.org/faq#which-version-of-woodpecker-should-i-use]
Clear and concise description of the problem
A repo can use many secrets, some of which may have non-obvious origins. I find it would be useful to be able to add notes to a secret, which could contain any information that the user deems helpful for them. An example use case would be:
secret_name: SOME_API_TOKEN
secret_value: <super_secret_value>
description: "Used by process xxx. Expiry date: ddmmyy, renew by going to ..., include API scope blablabla"
Suggested solution
This could be a simple plain text field, visible to anyone who has access to create/modify secrets, along with the secret name. The aim is to provide hints/document the secret.
I noticed that gitlab recently added this to their CI, which I find extremely helpful.
In a perfect world, secrets would be generated in code, with proper documentation, but it's not always possible in tiny projects.
Alternative
No response
Additional context
No response
Validations
next
version already [https://woodpecker-ci.org/faq#which-version-of-woodpecker-should-i-use]The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: