Open AntoineDao opened 3 years ago
^ I have deployed the newer version of queenbee-argo
which supports this proposed feature to staging so we can test it live while making a decision on whether or not to accept using artifact inputs and command template parameters.
I am in favor of increased flexibility by allowing this. Clearly one of the users already thinks it should be valid :smirk_cat: . I'm not totally sure what the trade off is though. Is there some risk or complexity involved in enabling it?
I have noticed that @chriswmackey has used an input artifact as a parameter inside of a function's command. Technically this should not be allowed by Queenbee and we could write a test for it to make sure it doesn't break. Here is a shortened example of the command
Function
written by Chris:Should be Invalid
Valid equivalent
Bug or Feature?
I think this issue could be turned into something more interesting than a simple bug fix. My thinking is that we already duplicate the
condition.csv
path in the example above.What do we think of allowing this sort of parametrization of the command where an artifact input can be templated in the command such that executors (ie:
queenbee-argo
andqueenbee-luigi
then replace the templated value with thepath
key in the input artifact object?This would have the following benefits:
I'm going to tag the people that seem most relevant to add to this discussion here: @chriswmackey, @mostaphaRoudsari and @tymokvo