You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
One of the shortcomings I've encountered is allowing for slight differences in ci workflows vs local workflows. I was thinking of adding an additional property to the devcontainer-feature.json spec that would allow for grouping features between the two environments. Namely, allow for a subset of features to be used in ci workflows via cli flags.
Optional Metadata used for excluding this feature.
Example
Consider a devcontainer used for maintaining a gitops related repo. Locally one requires secret management and some manual handling tools, but in CI these tools are not required. A user would mark the features not needed for CI via a group named local. Ref:
When it comes to starting the devcontainer locally, there would be no change to existing behaviour. In CI, one would pass in the flag:
> devcontainer up --exclude-group local
This would spin up the devcontainer without the features in the local group.
Plan
I don't mind putting up a couple PRs across the various repo's (cli , ci) to make this a reality, but I'm looking for a green light on the work before I put in the time. Anyhow, I'm open to any feedback, e.g. make the system more extensible with include and exclude or whatever.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
[Proposal] Optional features (feature groups)
One of the shortcomings I've encountered is allowing for slight differences in ci workflows vs local workflows. I was thinking of adding an additional property to the
devcontainer-feature.json
spec that would allow forgrouping features between the two environments. Namely, allow for a subset of features to be used in ci workflows via cli flags.
Proposal
Extend the devcontainer-feature.json spec with the following property:
group
Example
Consider a devcontainer used for maintaining a gitops related repo. Locally one requires secret management and some manual handling tools, but in CI these tools are not required. A user would mark the features not needed for CI via a group named
local
. Ref:devcontainer.json
When it comes to starting the devcontainer locally, there would be no change to existing behaviour. In CI, one would pass in the flag:
This would spin up the devcontainer without the features in the
local
group.Plan
I don't mind putting up a couple PRs across the various repo's (cli , ci) to make this a reality, but I'm looking for a green light on the work before I put in the time. Anyhow, I'm open to any feedback, e.g. make the system more extensible with
include
andexclude
or whatever.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: