Skip to content

Conversation

@nucleotraslacion-svg
Copy link

@nucleotraslacion-svg nucleotraslacion-svg commented Feb 2, 2026

Description

<-- short description of the template(s) and/or reason for update -->

Type of change

Please mark options that are relevant.

  • New template
  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue in the template)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality to the template)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing template behavior to be not backward compatible)

How Has This Been Tested?

Please mark the following checks done

  • Schema validated using JSON Schema template.schema
  • Template functionality checked using Online Editor
  • Template is checked using template linter
  • Template file name follows the pattern <providerId>.<serviceId>.json
  • resource URL provided with logoUrl is actually served by a webserver

Checklist of common problems

Mark all the checkboxes after conducting the check. Comment on any point which is not fulfilled.

  • digital signatures are used and syncPubKeyDomain specified (yes, warnPhishing is an option, but some providers reject such templates by policy, so signing shall be a default)
  • syncRedirectDomain is specified when intended to use redirect_uri parameter in the synchronous flow
  • no TXT record with SPF content (i.e. "v=spf1 ...") instead of using SPFM record type on APEX
  • txtConflictMatchingMode is set on TXT records which shall be unique on a label (like DMARC)
  • variables are set to the smallest scope needed (i.e. limit possibility to be misused to set any arbitrary record and conflict with other template). Too broad scope example: @ TXT "%verification%". Better usage: @ TXT "foo-verification=%verification%".
  • no variables as a host name to apply template on subdomain instead of standard host parameter
  • no explicit usage of %host% variable in host attribute
  • essential setting is used on records, which the user shall be able to change or remove manually later without dropping the whole template (like DMARC)

Example variable values

<-- to make review process easier please provide example set of variable values for this template -->

<-- Example: -->

var1: aaa
var2: foo.com

<-- Or provide the whole testData object from the Online Editor after testing and using "Add as test" button -->

"testData": {
    "testset": {
      "variables": {
        "domain": "example.com",
        "host": "foo",
        "example": "bar"
      },
      "results": [
        {
          "type": "TXT",
          "name": "foo",
          "ttl": 86400,
          "data": "\"bar\""
        }
      ]
    }
  }

@pawel-kow pawel-kow added PR description incomplete The PR description template was not filled in at all, altered or filled in improperly. Checklist of common problems not complete See PR template and mark *all* checkboxes, even if not applicable. Explain any discrepancies. invalid labels Feb 2, 2026
@pawel-kow
Copy link
Member

This is some crap. Closing.

@pawel-kow pawel-kow closed this Feb 2, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Checklist of common problems not complete See PR template and mark *all* checkboxes, even if not applicable. Explain any discrepancies. invalid PR description incomplete The PR description template was not filled in at all, altered or filled in improperly.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants