Skip to content

Integration: Support for GCP buckets #1140

Closed

Description

@vprashrex

Is your feature request related to a problem?
We lack integration with Google GCP buckets, which hinders users from resolving private attachment URLs using their own credentials. This limits the potential for assessments involving these private URLs.

Describe the solution you'd like

Image

Activity

  1. changed the title [-]Bucket: Google GCP Bucket Integration[/-] [+]Integration: Support for GCP buckets[/+] on Aug 20, 2026
  2. self-assigned this
    on Aug 20, 2026
  3. moved this from To Do to In Progress in Kaapi-devon Aug 20, 2026
  4. moved this from In Progress to In Review in Kaapi-devon Aug 20, 2026
  5. moved this from In Review to In Progress in Kaapi-devon Aug 20, 2026
  6. kartpop commented on Aug 20, 2026

    @kartpop
    Collaborator

    A few additional implementation details/constraints worth capturing beyond the original description:

    Abstraction requirements

    • The assessment pipeline should not contain the if/else routing logic. Suggest a convert_to_public_url-style utility taking source URLs + destination provider and returning usable URLs, acting as a no-op when the input is already public.
    • Support GCS, AWS S3, and plain HTTPS as source types initially; extensible later.
    • Introduce a BucketProvider class hierarchy mirroring the existing LLMProvider pattern (GCS first, S3 later).
    • Return a map keyed by assessment row ID → URL rather than an index-matched list, since index matching across input/output lists is error-prone. A batch may assume a single source bucket, but the map structure is still preferred.

    Path A constraint: the bucket referenced in the service-account credential must be the same bucket the attachments live in.

    TTL: should be configurable (1h/24h both discussed) rather than fixed at 24h.

    Testing plan: validate both GCS pathways with small standalone scripts — insert a service-account credential row in the credentials table (mimicking partner setup), drop a test JPG in the bucket, and verify read access via (a) direct URI to Vertex and (b) signed URL. S3 doesn't need retesting since the signed-URL flow is already proven.

    fyi: @vprashrex

    Related: PR #1138 (open), PR #1131 (open)

  7. moved this from In Progress to In Review in Kaapi-devon Aug 21, 2026
  8. moved this from In Review to Closed in Kaapi-devon Aug 26, 2026
  9. github-actions commented on Aug 26, 2026

    @github-actions

    🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 1.5.0-main.12 🎉

    The release is available on GitHub release

    Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Type

No type

Projects

  • Status
    Closed

Milestone

No milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions