\n\nThis is inconsistent with how secrets are handled elsewhere in Woodpecker:\n\nIn the Secrets section, users cannot view secret values (they can only update them).\n\nIn the Forge edit form, the OAuth Client Secret is already hidden by default.\n\n### Suggested solution\n\nIt would be preferable if the Git password field in the Forge UI were also hidden (like secrets), so that even Woodpecker admins cannot view these values in plaintext once they are saved.\n\n### Alternative\n\n_No response_\n\n### Additional context\n\n_No response_\n\n### Validations\n\n- [x] Checked that the feature isn't part of the `next` version already [https://woodpecker-ci.org/versions]\n- [x] Read the [docs](https://woodpecker-ci.org/docs/intro).\n- [x] Check that there isn't already an [issue](https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues) that request the same feature to avoid creating a duplicate.",[3139],{"name":3140,"color":3141},"feature","180DBE",5471,"woodpecker-ci","woodpecker","open","Hide Bitbucket Data Center credentials in Forge UI","2025-08-31T10:17:07Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/5471",0.7273368,{"description":3151,"labels":3152,"number":3157,"owner":3143,"repository":3144,"state":3145,"title":3158,"updated_at":3159,"url":3160,"score":3161},"Add support for running with GitHub and gitea for example\n\nIdea:\n- check if multiple providers are defined \n- if so, use the solution for #136 to supply a `login with $PROVIDER` button and namespace the repositories `$PROVIDER/ORG/REPO` \n- could even be extended with a `$PROVIDER_PROVIDERS` List, eg `GITEA_PROVIDERS=\"DEVGITEA,PRODGITEA\"` and using these as new variable names `DEVGITEA_OAUTHID=...`\n\n# TODO\n- [x] add forges table #1417 \n- [x] add id of forge to repo #1417 \n- [x] use forge of repo #1417\n- [x] find repos based on id (slugs could be the same across forges) #1691 \n- [x] allow to login with all configured forges #3822 \n- [x] add admin ui to add / edit / remove forges #5328 #425\n- [ ] allow user to connect with multiple forges\n- [ ] show the forge host / name for repos / orgs (the same repo / org name could be used on multiple forges)\n- [ ] #4867\n- [ ] allow all forges to be configured by env vars (https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/pull/5328#issuecomment-3096512802)\n",[3153,3156],{"name":3154,"color":3155},"epic","B245A1",{"name":3140,"color":3141},138,"Add support for multiple forges ","2025-07-25T05:31:21Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/138",0.7619313,{"description":3163,"labels":3164,"number":3166,"owner":3143,"repository":3144,"state":3145,"title":3167,"updated_at":3168,"url":3169,"score":3170},"### Clear and concise description of the problem\n\nAs a user of Woodpecker I want a specific step to dialogue with a service running on the docker host so that the software used in that step can register itself correctly and run further commands\n\n### Suggested solution\n\nWhen using `docker run`, you can pass the `--add-host` option in order to edit the `hosts` file of the container.\r\nIn my case, `--add-host=host.docker.internal:host-gateway` must be passed to the docker run.\r\nI would like this option to become available when defining a woodpecker `step`. \r\n\r\nThis is mandatory for specific products that requires to talk to the docker host (for license registration purpose for example).\n\n### Alternative\n\nThe containerized application I use try to resolve `host.docker.internal` so I tried replacing that with the docker host IP in the code directly, but there are some parts that I can't edit that still try to connect to `host.docker.internal`.\r\n\r\nI wish I could edit `/etc/hosts` directly from my Dockerfile but this is not possible.\r\n\r\nAnother alternative would be to run on a local backend instead of Docker and to run a customized `docker run` with the required option.\n\n### Additional context\n\n_No response_\n\n### Validations\n\n- [X] Checked that the feature isn't part of the `next` version already [https://woodpecker-ci.org/faq#which-version-of-woodpecker-should-i-use]\n- [X] Read the [Contributing Guidelines](https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md).\n- [X] Read the [docs](https://woodpecker-ci.org/docs/intro).\n- [X] Check that there isn't already an [issue](https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues) that request the same feature to avoid creating a duplicate.",[3165],{"name":3140,"color":3141},2629,"Add `add-host` step option","2023-10-23T10:11:40Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/2629",0.7860387,{"description":3172,"labels":3173,"number":3174,"owner":3143,"repository":3144,"state":3145,"title":3175,"updated_at":3176,"url":3177,"score":3178},"Thank you for providing and maintaining this tool.\n\nFrom the help:\n\n```sh\nwoodpecker-cli repo add [command [command options]] \u003Cforge-remote-id>\nwoodpecker-cli repo update [command [command options]] \u003Crepo-id|repo-full-name>\n```\n\nWhat would it take to accept a `repo-full-name` for `woodpecker-cli repo add` ? It's a bit awkward to get the `forge-remote-id` for a repo.\n\nI've searched the issue tracker for \"repo add\" and didn't find an existing discussion.",[],5221,"Allow repo name in `woodpecker-cli repo add`","2025-05-31T05:12:44Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/5221",0.81103444,{"description":3180,"labels":3181,"number":3185,"owner":3143,"repository":3144,"state":3145,"title":3186,"updated_at":3187,"url":3188,"score":3189},"### Clear and concise description of the problem\r\n\r\nI want to prevent the collaborators with write permission to the repository from accessing specific secrets. \r\n\r\nIn Gitea push access to the protected branches can be limited to the whitelisted users and in Gitlab it can be limited to the maintainers (not developers)\r\n\r\n### Suggested solution\r\n\r\na checkbox at settings#secrets named \"Available only for the protected branches\" (or something similar) which is unchecked by default\r\n\r\n### Alternative\r\n\r\nAs an alternative I tried limiting the secret to a specific image without a shell which runs as a service. This service had a custom entry point which extracted the secret from environment and passed it as a cli flag to the tool which uses the secret. This solution is very involved and adds lots of extra complexity.\r\n\r\n### Additional context\r\n\r\nThis feature already exists in Gitlab CI. See `Protect variable` option in https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/variables/#add-a-cicd-variable-to-a-project\r\n\r\n### Validations\r\n\r\n- [X] Read the [Contributing Guidelines](https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md) and it was irrelevant for opening issues!\r\n- [X] Read the [docs](https://woodpecker-ci.org/docs/intro).\r\n- [X] Check that there isn't already an [issue](https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues) that request the same feature to avoid creating a duplicate.",[3182],{"name":3183,"color":3184},"enhancement","7E1FE4",1341,"Add option to expose secrets only to protected branches","2022-10-26T13:09:21Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/1341",0.81149244,{"description":3191,"labels":3192,"number":3197,"owner":3143,"repository":3144,"state":3198,"title":3199,"updated_at":3200,"url":3201,"score":3202},"## admin permission check\r\n- ...\r\n\r\n## get pr file changes\r\n- [ ] bitbucket #1047\r\n",[3193,3194],{"name":3183,"color":3184},{"name":3195,"color":3196},"summary","C3DC73",1138,"closed","Forges missing Support of functions","2025-06-12T07:09:40Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/1138",0.7684664,{"description":3204,"labels":3205,"number":3207,"owner":3143,"repository":3144,"state":3198,"title":3208,"updated_at":3209,"url":3210,"score":3211},"```\r\nCI_FORGE_TYPE = (gitea,github,...)\r\nCI_FORGE_URL = github.com # gitea.com, codeberg.org, gitea.company.xyz ...\r\n[CI_FORGE_API] = should we craft that too, or leave it to plugins?\r\n```\r\n\r\ndid I missed something else that is usefull\r\n\r\nmight be usefull for plugins to address #1376 ",[3206],{"name":3183,"color":3184},1787,"Add forge build in env vars","2023-06-01T14:50:54Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/1787",0.7694853,{"description":3213,"labels":3214,"number":3219,"owner":3143,"repository":3144,"state":3198,"title":3220,"updated_at":3221,"url":3222,"score":3223},"The pipelines executed for PRs in this repo could be improved to save resources and speed up:\r\n- use more path filters\r\n- only push images if requested for a PR (could be done by adding a label to the PR)\r\n- only run build for amd64 architecture as cross-compiling is pretty slow\r\n- ...",[3215,3216],{"name":3183,"color":3184},{"name":3217,"color":3218},"build","6AB8BA",1910,"Speed up woodpecker pipelines","2023-08-08T11:24:52Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/1910",0.79202765,{"description":3225,"labels":3226,"number":3227,"owner":3143,"repository":3144,"state":3198,"title":3228,"updated_at":3229,"url":3230,"score":3231},"### Clear and concise description of the problem\n\nWhen running in smaller environments, running multiple instances (server and agent combo) might be cumbersome / limiting the resources available to an instance and making each instance slow. This is especially pressing, when deploying via container (mostly Kubernetes, Docker does not have Quotas if I remember correctly) with resource quotas set (which is often required to protect services in fairly resource limited setups)\r\n\r\nAdditionally switching between instances and not confusing them might add another layer of user workload.\n\n### Suggested solution\n\nEnable the use of multiple forges in one woodpecker-server (the agent should be pretty much uninfluenced by this), best case allowing for user mappings, so a single login will manage all forges.\n\n### Alternative\n\nAdd a way of at least having multiple authentication sources (effectively forges) and switch between the accounts, while still using the same instance of woodpecker.\n\n### Additional context\n\nI am absolutely unclear whether something like this is feasible, but it would be nice for people having to spread across multiple forges (i.e. Github and their own Gitea instance).\r\n\r\nA nice \"premium\" feature would be if it would be possible to configure multiple forges of the same type in one server instance (which would at least require changing the way the forge-configs are handed over to the instance).\n\n### Validations\n\n- [X] Read the [Contributing Guidelines](https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md).\n- [X] Read the [docs](https://woodpecker-ci.org/docs/intro).\n- [X] Check that there isn't already an [issue](https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues) that request the same feature to avoid creating a duplicate.",[],1376,"Enable one Instance to use multiple forges","2022-10-30T16:34:00Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/1376",0.801009,{"description":3233,"labels":3234,"number":3239,"owner":3143,"repository":3144,"state":3198,"title":3240,"updated_at":3241,"url":3242,"score":3243},"- Secrets should be editable, but the secret itself should be hidden\r\n- Registries should be editable",[3235,3238],{"name":3236,"color":3237},"ui","46DEA2",{"name":3140,"color":3141},692,"Edit secrets & registries","2022-03-01T23:19:33Z","https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/issues/692",0.8022199,["Reactive",3245],{},["Set"],["ShallowReactive",3248],{"$fTRc1wZytZ_XrK4EfJfei_Sz-An4H4Yy6syhVxH_PVJc":-1,"$fo54PI3bRhAnT4o6tz_pmWrXSKajzff9AhYxB1K1SHf0":-1},"/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/5441"]