Skip to content

WIP: type/provider to manage secrets - #94

Draft
trefzer wants to merge 11 commits into
voxpupuli:masterfrom
cirrax:dev_cirrax
Draft

WIP: type/provider to manage secrets#94
trefzer wants to merge 11 commits into
voxpupuli:masterfrom
cirrax:dev_cirrax

Conversation

@trefzer

@trefzer trefzer commented Dec 1, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

add type and provider to manage secrets.
Theoretically you can choose another driver than the default file, but I did not test that.

@trefzer
trefzer force-pushed the dev_cirrax branch 2 times, most recently from b1e8a05 to f1d5d36 Compare December 1, 2025 22:04
@trefzer trefzer added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 1, 2025
@trefzer
trefzer marked this pull request as draft December 1, 2025 22:29
@trefzer trefzer changed the title type/provider to manage secrets WIP: type/provider to manage secrets Dec 1, 2025
@trefzer
trefzer force-pushed the dev_cirrax branch 10 times, most recently from 94d59bf to 3cf9d5d Compare December 5, 2025 20:47
@bastelfreak

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@traylenator could you have a look here please?

@trefzer
trefzer force-pushed the dev_cirrax branch 3 times, most recently from a2b88e2 to 9fe3dbd Compare December 5, 2025 21:49
@traylenator

traylenator commented Dec 8, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Had a play with this doing CRUD of secrets for root: and user:

Also with a deferred function e.g.

quadlets_secret{'foobar:quiet':
  secret => Deferred('oursecrets::get',['yoursecret']),
  labels => {'foo' => 'bar'},
}
Notice: /Stage[main]/Hg_playground::New/Quadlets_secret[foobar:quiet]/secret: changed [redacted] to [redacted]

I agree the title of user:secretname makes sense - that is the unique key to all secrets.

Everything working really well.

@trefzer

trefzer commented Dec 8, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

everything but these *#@!&.... acceptance tests ;(
(I think for root secrets, it's working beside the check (which I will have a look again), for user secrets, I deleted the test because they never worked).

commands podman: 'podman'

def should_user
@should_user || @should_user = resource[:name].split(':')[0]

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are we uninventing composite namevars here?

@edrude

edrude commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This is exactly what I need. Awesome!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement New feature or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants