Open CloudBeard opened 3 months ago
Certainly valid issues to call out - one being that the profile
flag is not currently implemented.
Second to that - i'd like to think about what the matrix of potential opportunities is - IE generation with:
If the above are all valid - maybe separation of the two could still be warranted?
The catalog and profile both go in the same field and is a 1 to 1 was my original thought process.
Now I could see something along the lines of Impact Levels or another reason to map a profile of High/Mod/Low and the catalog because X control is outside of the profile but needs to be represented so needing to do a control-implementations
for a catalog and a profile could be a thing.
revisiting this topic - Profile generation #694 implements a --source / -s
flag for the use of either profile or catalog to align to this thought.
Will require some rewiring but I do agree with your original thought and aligning to a 1:1 mapping.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Component Definitions can be built using a
catalog
orprofile
seecomponent-definition
but thelula generate component
command requires the-c
flag and accepts either a catalog or profile while failing if you only provide the-p
for the profile.lula generate component -c https://raw.githubusercontent.com/GSA/fedramp-automation/93ca0e20ff5e54fc04140613476fba80f08e3c7d/dist/content/rev5/baselines/json/FedRAMP_rev5_HIGH-baseline-resolved-profile_catalog.json -r ac-1
Describe the solution you'd like
Remove the
-c
and-p
flags in favor of an-s
flag for--source
that accepts either thecatalog
orprofile
. (rename-c
to-s
flags and leave the functionality as it since it accepts both and works.)Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.