Skip to content
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

Allow a custom nginx.conf source to be defined #241

Closed

Conversation

Slashbunny
Copy link

A legacy configuration I was working with recently was very complex. Using vhost and location definitions left me with something more complex and harder to maintain than the original file itself (and twice as long). In some cases, some of the techniques weren't supported at all, or I'd need to implement it differently to get around validations, which was making it all the more complex. I decided to simply move the existing vhost configuration files into place using a file resource and notify nginx::service, as this was a much cleaner solution.

I find myself in the same situation for the main nginx.conf, but I don't want to drop use of the module completely, so I created this patch.

This may be something you don't want to even merge in or you may want to do it differently. It may be considered out of scope of the module to only use it only for the package and service management. FWIW, I use all parts of this module in other scenarios and it works great, thanks in advance!

In cases where configuration complexity or legacy support dictates the
need for hand-crafted configuration, allow the user to pass in a file
source for nginx.conf.

Currently it's possible to use this module and define/manage your own
virtual hosts and other configuration. This change will allow the main
config to be manually managed as well, but still take advantage of the
repo and service management of the module.
@jfryman
Copy link
Contributor

jfryman commented Mar 17, 2014

@Slashbunny would #272 also meet your need? same thing essentially, but also proxy config.

@Slashbunny
Copy link
Author

Yeah, I agree, it's essentially the same thing. It should work fine. Thanks!

@Slashbunny Slashbunny closed this Mar 18, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants