-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
People will probably want some kind of output wiring #31
Comments
It strikes me that the program currently does not care where state is stored for a given root. In order to provide a downstream root with a remote state data source on its dependency, it will need to know where the dependency stores its state. Which means we'll need a This feels too heavy. How about this: for this ticket to be called Done, implement an example that uses a dependency and internally has a remote state block that pulls on some of the root scope variables to configure that data source. |
The remote_state option is interesting, but I think out of scope for this entire project. There are two options I see, not mutually exclusive:
If we implement both options, the context (and thus the debuggable context file) would look like this: root = {...}
scope = {...}
attributes = {...}
dependencies = {
foo = {
attributes = {...}
output = {...}
}
} |
(No, I haven't done anything with partials yet. I do have a |
AC for this is the 2nd point above.
|
ooh, maybe the project has a default, and the root can have a flag that overrides that setting. I like that. |
not unlike Terragrunt's
dependency
blocks. maybe useterraform_remote_state
blocks though.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: