databricks/cli issue: strict-mode warning when a group is set at target level and on a job
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
Valutazione
- Difficoltà
- 4/5
- Tempo stimato
- 3-5 giorni
- Idoneità per principianti
- 45/100
Direzione di ricerca
The debug log places the warning after the ApplyBundlePermissions mutator and before FixPermissions; start by reading those entry points and the permission validation described in the issue. Reproduce with the supplied configuration using databricks bundle validate -t dev-ci --strict. Done means maintainers clarify whether permissions can be layered and either stop warning for entries in different layers or make validation and documentation agree.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Descrizione
Describe the issue
Declaring the same group in a target's permissions and again in a job's permissions inside that target produces a validation warning. In strict mode that warning is a hard error. The permissions docs describe this layered pattern as supported, with a defined order of precedence, and recommend defining permissions at the top level.
The docs also say a principal cannot appear in both the top-level permissions mapping and within resources. The two statements conflict, and the CLI behavior matches the second one.
Documentation conflict
The Set permissions for resources page (last updated Sep 11, 2026) makes statements that cannot all hold at once.
| Section | What the page says |
|---|---|
| Note near the top | Permissions cannot overlap: a user, group, or service principal cannot be defined in both the top-level permissions mapping and within resources. |
| All resources | Databricks recommends the top-level permissions mapping for managing bundle resource permissions. |
| Combined permissions | Permissions declared for a resource at the top level are combined with those declared for the same resource in a target. |
| Order of precedence | Lists four levels, from resource-in-target down to top-level. Its example sets test-group at the top level, on a job, and on that job in a target. |
The CLI schema doc strings in PR 5664 repeat the no-overlap rule: a principal cannot be set in both a resource's permissions and the top-level permissions mapping.
Workarounds and request
Current workarounds, each with a cost:
- Declare each principal in one place only. Either drop the group from the target-level
permissions, or drop it from the job and accept one level for the whole target. Dropping it from the target level only works if the group has no access to the deployment folder. Otherwise strict mode raises a second warning: "workspace folder has permissions not configured in bundle". - If the target-level levels suffice, use one of
CAN_VIEW,CAN_MANAGE, orCAN_RUNthere and remove the job-level entry. - Run validation without strict mode, which loses the gate for every other warning.
Request to maintainers:
- Confirm whether the same principal at target level and resource level is supported.
- If it is, stop emitting this warning for entries in a different layer.
- If it is not, correct the documentation: the recommended-approach text and the order-of-precedence example.
Configuration
The config below is sanitized from the real bundle. The same group is set to CAN_VIEW for the whole target and to CAN_MANAGE_RUN on one job in that target.
bundle:
name: my-bundle
variables:
developer_group:
default: my-developer-group
resources:
jobs:
my_job:
name: my_job
# tasks omitted
targets:
dev-ci:
mode: production
workspace:
host: https://<workspace>.cloud.databricks.com
root_path: /Workspace/<path>/.bundle/my-bundle/dev-ci
permissions:
- service_principal_name: <deployment-sp>
level: CAN_MANAGE
- group_name: ${var.developer_group}
level: CAN_VIEW
resources:
jobs:
my_job:
permissions:
- user_name: <user>@example.com
level: CAN_MANAGE
- group_name: ${var.developer_group}
level: CAN_MANAGE_RUN
Steps to reproduce the behavior
- Save the configuration above as
databricks.ymland fill in the placeholders. - Run
databricks bundle validate -t dev-ci --strict. - See the warning and the strict-mode error.
Expected Behavior
The permissions docs list an order of precedence for permissions defined in several places, from the resource in the target down to the bundle's top-level permissions. Under that order, a job-level entry in a target should override the target-level entry for the same group without a warning. The docs' own example combines a group at the top level, on a job, and on the same job in a target.
If layering the same principal is not supported, validation should say so clearly, and the docs should stop presenting it as the recommended path.
Actual Behavior
Validation reports one warning naming the group, then fails because strict mode forbids warnings. Output is sanitized except for the message wording and is from v1.20.0; v1.10.0 printed the last line as "Warnings are not allowed in strict mode". In the debug log the warning is printed right after the ApplyBundlePermissions mutator, before FixPermissions.
Warning: 'jobs' already has permissions set for '<developer-group>' group
Name: <bundle-name>
Target: dev-ci
Workspace:
Host: https://<workspace>.cloud.databricks.com
User: <service-principal-id>
Path: /Workspace/<path>/.bundle/<bundle-name>/dev-ci
Found 1 warning
Error: 1 warning was found. Warnings are treated as errors in strict mode
OS and CLI version
- Databricks CLI version:
Databricks CLI v1.20.0 (manually upgraded); also reproduced on v1.10.0 (Docker image) - Workspace: AWS
- Target mode:
production - Validation run in strict mode, which turns warnings into errors
- Run in the
ghcr.io/databricks/cli:latest Docker image on a self-hosted runner - OS:
Linux
Is this a regression?
Not known. The warning reproduces on v1.20.0 (installed manually) and on v1.10.0 (the current Docker image).
Debug Logs
Output of databricks bundle validate -t dev-ci --strict --log-level=debug, run on v1.20.0, with sensitive values redacted and unrelated lines omitted (full redacted log can be attached):
[... earlier lines omitted ...]
16:24:08 Debug: Apply pid=58 mutator=ProcessStaticResources mutator=DashboardFixups
16:24:08 Debug: Apply pid=58 mutator=ProcessStaticResources mutator=GenieSpaceFixups
16:24:08 Debug: Apply pid=58 mutator=ProcessStaticResources mutator=ApplyBundlePermissions
Warning: 'jobs' already has permissions set for '<developer-group>' group
16:24:08 Debug: Apply pid=58 mutator=ProcessStaticResources mutator=FixPermissions
16:24:08 Debug: Apply pid=58 mutator=PythonMutator(load_resources)
16:24:08 Debug: Apply pid=58 mutator=PythonMutator(apply_mutators)
[... lines omitted ...]
16:24:08 Debug: Apply pid=58 mutator=CheckPermissions
[... lines omitted ...]
16:24:08 Debug: Apply pid=58 mutator=ValidateSharedRootPermissions
[... lines omitted ...]
16:24:08 Debug: ApplyParallel pid=58 mutator=validate:folder_permissions
[... lines omitted ...]
16:24:08 Debug: Apply pid=58 mutator=ResolveJobRunFileTriggers
Name: <bundle-name>
Target: dev-ci
Workspace:
Host: https://<workspace>.cloud.databricks.com
User: <service-principal-id>
Path: /Workspace/<path>/.bundle/<bundle-name>/dev-ci
Found 1 warning
Error: 1 warning was found. Warnings are treated as errors in strict mode
16:24:08 Info: failed execution pid=58 exit_code=1 error="1 warning was found. Warnings are treated as errors in strict mode"
- Lingua principale
- Go
- Stelle
- 405
- Fork
- 250
- Merge medio
- 1g 11h
- PR unite (30g)
- 236
Preparare l'ambiente
- Include un Dockerfile o un file Docker Compose
- Ha un modello di pull request
- Nessuna guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Altre issue di databricks/cli
-
Apps commands only accept relative path to app.ymlForse già presa @yuri-rod l’ha presa 9 giorni fa. ApertaCLI
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 82/100
databricks/cli#6910 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
DABs
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 68/100
databricks/cli#6670 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
DABs engine/direct Enhancement
Difficoltà 3/5 1-2 giorni Idoneità per principianti 56/100
databricks/cli#7013 · 2 reazioni ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
DABs
Difficoltà 5/5 Più di una settimana Idoneità per principianti 18/100
databricks/cli#7002 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Bundle reports schema update for every deploymentForse già presa @yuri-rod l’ha presa oggi. ApertaDABs
Difficoltà 4/5 3-5 giorni Idoneità per principianti 35/100
databricks/cli#6986 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
Tutte le issue di databricks/cli
Issue simili
-
component/gpu-kubelet-plugin component/helm needs-triage
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 62/100
kubernetes-sigs/dra-driver-nvidia-gpu#1559 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
TOTP enrollment returns 500 for phone-only users (empty TOTP account name)Forse già presa @emiliosandoval4 l’ha presa oggi. Aperta
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 60/100
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
8.9 to 8.10 Helm upgrade guide still says deprecated keys are removed in chart v16 (Camunda 8.11)Aperta
Difficoltà 1/5 Meno di un'ora Idoneità per principianti 78/100
camunda/camunda-platform-helm#7559 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
docs: namespaceRegexes example teaches prefix matching, but regexes are matched as a substringForse già presa Una pull request collegata a questa issue è aperta o già unita. Apertatriage/pending-triage
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 74/100
external-secrets/external-secrets#7117 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 2 giorni
-
bug
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 72/100
ENTERPILOT/GoModel#1183 · 1 commento ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno