-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Feature Request: Support prefix on policy name #239
Comments
fix #239 Co-authored-by: Casey Vockrodt <[email protected]>
This issue has been resolved in version 4.24.0 🎉 |
This is awesome... thanks @bryantbiggs @antonbabenko !! |
@davidaah you're welcome! If you enjoy the modules we've created please give them a ⭐ and have your friends give them a ⭐ - and if your organization uses the modules to run their infrastructure, have them consider supporting through sponsorship. Cheers! |
I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues. If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further. |
Is your request related to a new offering from AWS?
No
Is your request related to a problem? Please describe.
We have specific naming convention requirements for roles and policies which is preventing us from being able to adopt this module. Role name prefix was added previously #101 but a similar feature is not available for Policy name prefix.
I may be able to contribute this back, but confirm there was buy-in in the first place to add it (along with the preferred approach, see two variations listed below).
Describe the solution you'd like.
Ideally a new (optional) variable would be added for a policy name prefix to either completely override the current value of
name_prefix
inaws_iam_policy
or just provide a value which is pre-pended to the defaultFor example either of the following would be fine:
or
It's unclear to me the viability of the second option, in the case where the role needs to attach multiple policies the consumer would only be able to specify a single prefix and may lose some of the niceties of having something in the policy name which describes what the policy is for. As of now, i think this module only attaches one policy per role so that may be a non-issue in the short term.
Describe alternatives you've considered.
The only available option right now would be to fork the module and exposing this configuration
Additional context
N/A
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: