Closed eshepelyuk closed 7 months ago
Hi @eshepelyuk,
at this time no. It is currently the only way to do this (and should work fine I think).
But saying this, would be nice to have a shorter way to do simple access to Chart
and Release
data.
A new transformation, maybe _HT~
, which gives access to the the root context. In analogy to _HT*
it may return simple values and complete array and dicts addressed via dot notation I think, eg:
_HT~Chart.Version
_HT~Release.Name
If you need more precise access to e.g. a dependency in .Chart
:
dependencies: # A list of the chart requirements (optional)
- name: The name of the chart (nginx)
version: The version of the chart ("1.2.3")
you should use the flexible _HT!
with (index . "$")
anyways.
@Baum053 Was thinking that could maybe something you like to a look at?
Will try to get some time for this next week, definitly sounds like a good idea.
Thanks, folks.
Wanted to give a little update since it is taking a bit longer. First tests are looking good, probably we will introduce a notation like this
_HT**Chart.Version
The problem we are currently fighting with is that the Chart object we get back sadly for some reasons has lowercase properties instead of uppercase: https://helm.sh/docs/topics/charts/#the-chartyaml-file This will probably end up confusing for a lot of people so we try to do it directly in a way that both cases work.
As helm docs saying https://helm.sh/docs/topics/charts/#predefined-values
Happy to announce we were finally able to release this feature. It is now available in the newest releases 1.29.7, 1.28.6 and 1.27.15
We documentated it shortly here: https://github.com/vidispine/hull/blob/main/hull/doc/transformations.md#get-chartrelease-informations For more examples how it can be used you can check the section test-get-transformation-on-root in our test file main/hull/files/test/HULL/sources/cases/basic/basic.values.hull.yaml
Thanks @Baum053!
Hello When using hull I need to access
.Chart
and.Release
objects. Currently I am doing it like thisIs there simpler/proper/idiomatic way of doing this ?