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
if this would be possible it could bring a couple of benefits, though I'm certainly interested in possible downsides/issues
No confusion as to if I've mapped the right id to ENVIRONMENT_VARIABLE_NAME
No need to get the id from the CLI (couldn't find another way currently to get the id)
I could have different projects for staging, production etc each with the same set of equally named secrets, so I'd only have to provide a different access_token to the action instead of defining a separate step and having to map all secrets again because they have different IDs.
Or maybe I'm using it currently wrong and there's other ways of achieving the same?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The team is currently evaluating the retrieval of secrets by name for consideration in a future release.
As an initial improvement, the process of retrieving the UUID has been streamlined and is now conveniently displayed below every secret.
Hey, just finally started integrating Secrets Manager into my workflow and am in general pretty happy to finally get more structure and clarity.
I was wondering if it'd be possible to define the secrets using their name instead of id like so
instead of shtg like this
if this would be possible it could bring a couple of benefits, though I'm certainly interested in possible downsides/issues
ENVIRONMENT_VARIABLE_NAME
access_token
to the action instead of defining a separate step and having to map all secrets again because they have different IDs.Or maybe I'm using it currently wrong and there's other ways of achieving the same?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: