Skip to content

Conversation

@brendan-myers
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Added support for API key auth to Temporal Cloud
  • Modified the config structure so Temporal Cloud config is nested

@brendan-myers brendan-myers requested a review from taonic July 10, 2025 00:12
tls:
cert_file: "/path/to/<namespace>.<account>/tls.crt"
key_file: "/path/to/<namespace>.<account>/tls.key"
- proxy_id: "<id>"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How about something like client_id or workload_id here?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Or we could use temporal namespace as the target_id since this block is nested under targets then have a nested list for configuring clients/workloads per target.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we used the namespace as the id then only one target could be configured for that namespace; users wouldn't be able to configure more than one target that connected to the same namespace (if they wanted a different configuration for auth/encryption/etc).

workload_id would work. Preferable to client_id as that may sound like each client (worker) needs a separate target configured. workload_id is good too because it can be used as a correlation id, for instance, if some external system grants a workload access to a namespace it can use the id for CRUD operations on the proxy config if needed.

What do you think?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Would you change the key of this section from targets to workloads then?

@brendan-myers brendan-myers merged commit d601313 into main Jul 10, 2025
1 check passed
@brendan-myers brendan-myers deleted the api-keys branch July 10, 2025 04:36
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