I have a project on Github that works with some external API.I don't want to publish my key so it's taken from config that is not made public.However, I want to use Travis to run end-to-end tests. Basically I'll encrypt my API key - and maybe something else - then Travis will decrypt that and use the result in running my tests.Now, someone could just write a piece of code and keep source closed and distribute only the binary - or encrypted script that requires a key to be executed - without providing the actual source. That looks both questionable and somewhat similar to my situation.Do any major open-source licenses discourage my case?That Travis part better be open-source - because they provide free services for open-source projects. As of now, I am the only contributor and license is MIT so I don't see my particular case being a trouble. I'm more interested in case where license requires more from authors and/or users and where saying we use WTFPL for Travis and %another_license% for everything else is not an option.Only small test-related piece is getting encrypted, not something end users are supposed to ever interact with (however, that is not stated anywhere).
Encrypted behaviour/API keys for continuous integration (Travis)
license compatibility