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
The use of 'Set' instead of 'New' for the verb to create a secret doesn't seem intuitive to me, at least in the context of the descriptions provided by Get-Verb.
'New' creates a resource,
'Add' Adds a resource to a container or attaches an item to another item.
'Set' replaces data or creates a resource.
It seems to me that 'Set-Secret' here is combining all three verbs under the aegis of one verb.
If it were me, I'd look for the following.
'New-Secret' to create the secret,
'Add-Secret' to add it to the store.
'Set-Secret' to alter an existing secret.
These would make more sense to me than having a single cmdlet to do all three. 'Add-Secret' also auto-implies a 'Remove-Secret' and vice versa.
Summary of the new feature / enhancement
The use of 'Set' instead of 'New' for the verb to create a secret doesn't seem intuitive to me, at least in the context of the descriptions provided by Get-Verb.
'New' creates a resource,
'Add' Adds a resource to a container or attaches an item to another item.
'Set' replaces data or creates a resource.
It seems to me that 'Set-Secret' here is combining all three verbs under the aegis of one verb.
If it were me, I'd look for the following.
'New-Secret' to create the secret,
'Add-Secret' to add it to the store.
'Set-Secret' to alter an existing secret.
These would make more sense to me than having a single cmdlet to do all three. 'Add-Secret' also auto-implies a 'Remove-Secret' and vice versa.
Proposed technical implementation details (optional)
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: