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

Replace use of env vars with inputs instead #868

Open
plocket opened this issue Apr 11, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Replace use of env vars with inputs instead #868

plocket opened this issue Apr 11, 2024 · 0 comments
Labels
backlog and nice to have We won't be taking care of this any time soon. bite-sized Well circumscribed small task deep dive enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested

Comments

@plocket
Copy link
Collaborator

plocket commented Apr 11, 2024

Proposal

I think we can trade out env vars for just (multiline) inputs. We can keep the current behavior around so there's no breaking change.

Why

Env vars have always felt kind of amorphous and half-formed to me. They contain very little information about themselves. I also don't think they were intended for this. They feel like the wrong fit for the purpose.

  • This method might let people tell us which variables of theirs are sensitive and which are just variables.
  • This would reduce the number of Steps people have to learn. It would let us put sensitive info in Story Tables and let everyone use the regular "set" Step for sensitive info too.
  • It would let us log and take pictures of public variables created with secrets, giving our users more information about failing tests.
  • It might unify the way ALKiln takes in values by keeping everything under inputs.
  • It might simplify and unify the explaining we have to do. People may still need to make env vars to make safer workflows, though since they're making a workflow instead of an action, I wonder if that might just be for inputs. Even if they do end up needing to do that, we can more easily point to documentation without needing elaborate explanations because they'd be used as intended.

How

We'd parse strings for 2 different inputs:

with:
  ALKILN_SENSITIVE_TEST_VARIABLES: |
    foo: ${{ secrets.FOO }}
  ALKILN_PUBLIC_TEST_VARIABLES: |
    bar: bar

Are there downsides to this?

@plocket plocket added enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested deep dive backlog and nice to have We won't be taking care of this any time soon. bite-sized Well circumscribed small task labels Apr 11, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backlog and nice to have We won't be taking care of this any time soon. bite-sized Well circumscribed small task deep dive enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant