-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support a --password-store=inmemory
or similar
#188432
Comments
|
Yeah I think I need a new flag then that disables the "storing" part of the SecretStorage API. |
We have always had a way to disable reading from the keyring and use an in-memory secrets storage: `--disable-keytar`. This honors that flag in the new SecretStorage world... in a follow up PR we will migrate that flag to `--disable-secret-storage`. Additionally, I found a bug where we weren't firing events that we successfully set/deleted secrets in the browser version of secretStorageService and this fixes that by firing those events. This also reverts #189489 so that `BaseSecretStorageService.type` reads correctly early on... plus there's more discussion to be had in #189481 Fixes #188432
We have always had a way to disable reading from the keyring and use an in-memory secrets storage: `--disable-keytar`. This honors that flag in the new SecretStorage world... in a follow up PR we will migrate that flag to `--disable-secret-storage`. Additionally, I found a bug where we weren't firing events that we successfully set/deleted secrets in the browser version of secretStorageService and this fixes that by firing those events. This also reverts #189489 so that `BaseSecretStorageService.type` reads correctly early on... plus there's more discussion to be had in #189481 Fixes #188432
Marking as verified since our smoke tests are happy once again. |
The main purpose of this would be for running in CI when you need some sort of secret storage store, but it doesn't have to live on.
Right now
--password-store=basic
allows the SecretStorage API to work, but it still stores things on disk which isn't needed in CI scenarios... and it's probably better to store it in memory than weakly on disk in CI anyway.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: