Skip to content
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

Split secrets values across segmented secrets instances #227

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 30, 2024

Conversation

LeoColomb
Copy link
Member

This PR aims to facilitate secret values management.
By splitting them into per-domain secret instances, proper management policies can be applied.
It should also help to have consistent secrets in the time and across deployments, and ease secret instance deprecation.

Copy link
Contributor

@RangerRick RangerRick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@RangerRick RangerRick merged commit 7c8e8d2 into netbox-community:develop May 30, 2024
8 checks passed
@coolhome
Copy link
Contributor

coolhome commented May 30, 2024

@LeoColomb @RangerRick I think this PR introduced a new bug with existingSecretName + existingSecretKey

              - secret:
                  name: |2-

                        netbox-secrets
                  items:
                    - key: db_password
                      path: db_password
              - secret:
                  name: |2-

                        netbox-secrets
                  items:
                    - key: redis_tasks_password
                      path: redis_tasks_password
              - secret:
                  name: |2-

                        netbox-secrets
                  items:
                    - key: redis_cache_password
                      path: redis_cache_password

{{- else }}
{{- .Values.existingSecret | default (include "common.names.fullname" .) }}
{{ include "common.secrets.name" (dict "existingSecret" .Values.externalDatabase.existingSecretName "defaultNameSuffix" "postgresql" "context" $) }}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe these need to be {{-

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants