Skip to content

chore: remove gitleaks secrets scan workflow#1184

Merged
litianningdatadog merged 1 commit intomainfrom
tianning.li/remove-gitleaks
Apr 14, 2026
Merged

chore: remove gitleaks secrets scan workflow#1184
litianningdatadog merged 1 commit intomainfrom
tianning.li/remove-gitleaks

Conversation

@litianningdatadog
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@litianningdatadog litianningdatadog commented Apr 14, 2026

Summary

  • Removes the Gitleaks secrets scanning GitHub Actions workflow (.github/workflows/secrets-scan.yml) because we did not receive clarification from the vendor regarding the licensing question.

Motivation

Tracked in JIRA: SVLS-8660

Test plan

  • CI passes without the secrets scan workflow

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Removes the Gitleaks secrets scanning GitHub Actions workflow.

Resolves: SVLS-8660

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Removes the repository’s Gitleaks-based secrets scanning GitHub Actions workflow.

Changes:

  • Deletes .github/workflows/secrets-scan.yml, which previously ran Gitleaks on pull_request and push (main).
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

.github/workflows/secrets-scan.yml:1

  • Removing this workflow disables Gitleaks secrets scanning on pull requests and pushes. If secrets scanning is still required for this repo, add/point to the replacement mechanism (e.g., another CI job or GitHub Advanced Security secret scanning) so equivalent coverage remains in place.

@litianningdatadog litianningdatadog merged commit 1fc9882 into main Apr 14, 2026
56 checks passed
@litianningdatadog litianningdatadog deleted the tianning.li/remove-gitleaks branch April 14, 2026 15:23
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