Open cgriggs01 opened 6 years ago
Sure, that's a very reasonable request, but it will require some rework of the run-vault
script since it currently assumes users will use a GCS Bucket. The script even requires --gcs-bucket
as a parameter.
One option is to add a param like --storage-type
that accepts one of gcs
or consul
for the value, and errors out otherwise. We can then add in params like --consul-address
and --consul-path
, both of which will require that --storage-type
is set to consul
.
A more general approach would allow the user to pass arbitrary key-value pairs multiple times, something like run-vault --storage-type "consul" --storage-param "address=127.0.0.1"
, but that's harder to write and possibly more confusing for users.
Thoughts on the preferred approach? Also, PRs welcome for this!
Great, I would prefer the former option, with the ability to define the storage backend gcp
or consul
from an input variable in the module. As well as some documentation describing the different backends.
Thank you for your great work!
After seeing this with fresh-eyes, I think the section option is the better approach. It's not much more work and can be used with an arbitrary storage backend, making it future compatible.
PRs are welcome on this!
+1
This Vault module uses the Google Cloud storage backend. https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-google-vault/blob/master/modules/run-vault/run-vault#L138 It would be preferred for this module to use the Consul storage backend.
Would it be possible to update this module to use the Consul storage backend?