More flexible & generic config

faudebert commented 4 years ago

PR progress checklist (to be filled in by reviewers)

[ ] Changes to documentation are appropriate (or tick if not required)
[ ] Changes to tests are appropriate (or tick if not required)
[ ] Reviews completed

What type of PR is this?

Primary type

[ ] [build] Changes related to the build system
[ ] [chore] Changes to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries such as documentation generation
[ ] [ci] Changes to the continuous integration configuration
[ ] [feat] A new feature
[ ] [fix] A bug fix
[ ] [perf] A code change that improves performance
[x] [refactor] A code change that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature
[ ] [revert] A change used to revert a previous commit
[ ] [style] Changes that do not affect the meaning of the code (white-space, formatting, missing semi-colons, etc.)

Secondary type

[ ] [docs] Documentation changes
[ ] [test] Adding missing or correcting existing tests

Does this PR introduce a `BREAKING CHANGE`?

No.

Related issues and/or pull requests

None.

Describe the changes you're proposing

This pull-request makes (hopefully) better use of jinja.map and allows to seamlessly rename meta-state. While not useful per se for the official repository, renaming permits easier reusability when forking the formula (ex. you want to use both original and forked formulas in your environment).

Pillar / config required to test the proposed changes

No specific pillar is required. If my changes are correct, you should not see any visible changes when applying your state.

If interested, you could test meta-state renaming (ex. mv nginx-formula/{nginx,mynginx}). Considering no other changes have been made, you should be able to use mynginx meta-state as drop-in replacement for nginx. Also note that pillar namespace defaults to the meta-state name (i.e. mynginx in that example).

Optionnaly, you can customize the formula pillar namespace by setting {meta-state-name}:pillar:namespace pillar (ex. mynginx:pillar:namespace: mynginx2).

Debug log showing how the proposed changes work

None for now.

Documentation checklist

[ ] Updated the README (e.g. Available states).
[x] Updated pillar.example.

Testing checklist

[ ] Included in Kitchen (i.e. under state_top).
[ ] Covered by new/existing tests (e.g. InSpec, Serverspec, etc.).
[ ] Updated the relevant test pillar.

Additional context

pull-assistant[bot] commented 4 years ago

Best reviewed: commit by commit

Optimal code review plan (1 warning)

refactor(import): uniformize map.jinja imports

> `nginx/certificates.sls` 50% changes removed in refactor(pillar): na...

refactor(certs): use jinja.map to get pillars refactor(meta-state): use relative includes refactor(pillar): namespace defaults to meta-state name refactor(pillar): store defaults into yaml files refactor(pillar): factorize some defaults

Powered by Pull Assistant. Last update 4edd99f ... 5d1addc. Read the comment docs.

myii commented 4 years ago

@sticky-note Would you mind reviewing this PR?

faudebert commented 4 years ago

Rebased on master and followed @daks advice regarding using relative includes (thanks!).

Let me know if I can do anything to help with the merge process.

sticky-note commented 3 years ago

@daks @faudebert @noelmcloughlin Sorry for latency. @faudebert Is that possible to make use of map.jinja from template-formula. I think it is the best moment to integrate this. -> https://github.com/saltstack-formulas/template-formula/blob/5d36fda7a473a5aefbf4ff80cb9747cf608771c9/TEMPLATE/map.jinja You can remove all between the REMOVEME tags and all after this line https://github.com/saltstack-formulas/template-formula/blob/5d36fda7a473a5aefbf4ff80cb9747cf608771c9/TEMPLATE/map.jinja#L54. And you can do post processing if needed after this line too. Thanks

saltstack-formulas / nginx-formula