After looking through the module functions, I wanted to suggest instead of passing in a hashtable with some cyberark-specific lingo to AdditionalParameters, instead add those values as parameters.
You could create an alias on VaultName to be safeName so that either value could be passed in via a splatted hashtable to the function itself, and not only a parameter.
Additionally, you could pass in some of these other values like address, platformID, etc... to a -Metadata hashtable parameter, which would give your cmdlets the same behavior as the official Microsoft.PowerShell.SecretManagement cmdlets.
Great job on this extension!
After looking through the module functions, I wanted to suggest instead of passing in a hashtable with some cyberark-specific lingo to
AdditionalParameters
, instead add those values as parameters.For example, in Set-Secret, you have a
-VaultName
parameter, but it is not actually used, as the function assumes you are passing in thesafeName
value via the-AdditionalParameters
hashtable. https://github.com/aaearon/SecretManagement.CyberArk/blob/f820808ded0156109bf6608337a8fa201e6f84df/SecretManagement.CyberArk.Extension/SecretManagement.CyberArk.Extension.psm1#L104-L123You could create an alias on
VaultName
to besafeName
so that either value could be passed in via a splatted hashtable to the function itself, and not only a parameter.Additionally, you could pass in some of these other values like
address
,platformID
, etc... to a-Metadata
hashtable parameter, which would give your cmdlets the same behavior as the officialMicrosoft.PowerShell.SecretManagement
cmdlets.Thoughts?