Add support for keypair root configuration #109
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
fairclothjm
requested changes
May 21, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great work so far @robmonte! Left an initial round of comments.
fairclothjm
reviewed
May 21, 2025
fairclothjm
reviewed
May 22, 2025
|
|
||
| if database != "" { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was previously unused by all tests in CI, since the GH Secret was never set.
We have now set this secret in CI for new tests for keypair auth, which caused some failures in existing tests due to not having access to the DB.
Removing this from the user-pass authentication testing flow (unused). SNOWFLAKE_DATABASE will only be used in the Keypair authentication tests going forward
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Overview
A high level description of the contribution, including:
Who the change affects or is for (stakeholders)?
What is the change?
Why is the change needed?
How does this change affect the user experience (if at all)?
Design of Change
How was this change implemented?
Related Issues/Pull Requests
[ ] Issue #1234
[ ] PR #1234
Contributor Checklist
[ ] Add relevant docs to upstream Vault repository, or sufficient reasoning why docs won’t be added yet
My Docs PR Link
Example
[ ] Add output for any tests not ran in CI to the PR description (eg, acceptance tests)
[ ] Backwards compatible