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

Enhancement: porter run --file URL #174

Closed
nunix opened this issue Feb 19, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed

Enhancement: porter run --file URL #174

nunix opened this issue Feb 19, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
gap We missed a spot user experience 🌈💖 Make it easier for everyone to use Porter

Comments

@nunix
Copy link

nunix commented Feb 19, 2019

could porter run --file accept an URL as its input? (à la docker build)
This would allow, again like docker, to run with porter.yaml files stored on github (for example) and would allow testing, before building, without the need to download the said file or clone the repository.

Just an idea though, would totally understand if not applicable.

Thanks again for your work!

###EDIT
here is the workflow using a temporary file
image

@carolynvs
Copy link
Member

Good idea! Thanks I'll add that to the backlog

@carolynvs carolynvs added user experience 🌈💖 Make it easier for everyone to use Porter backlog labels Feb 19, 2019
@carolynvs carolynvs added this to the Easy Bake Oven Edition milestone Feb 19, 2019
@carolynvs carolynvs added the gap We missed a spot label Feb 19, 2019
@youreddy
Copy link

Hey @carolynvs, I took a stab at this issue in PR #187. Let me know if you have any feedback. Happy to make changes to it!

@carolynvs carolynvs added review and removed backlog labels Feb 26, 2019
@ghost ghost removed the review label Feb 28, 2019
@nunix
Copy link
Author

nunix commented Feb 28, 2019

You are simply Amazing 💯

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
gap We missed a spot user experience 🌈💖 Make it easier for everyone to use Porter
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants