Allow JSON files as input for Secrets Stores and KVStores about viceroy HOT 16 OPEN

As I noted in the PR, we're just about to embark on a process to redesign the schema for fastly.toml to make this sort of thing easier to do (and make it more flexible as well), so I'd like to hold off a few weeks before we continue this discussion to see how this feature fits with that. Once we have an initial proposal we'll post it on our community forum (https://community.fastly.com) to get input from you and others who use Viceroy, and I'll update this ticket when that happens.

from viceroy.

We're aiming to close out the feedback/input process this week, and then draft a proposal for what the new format might look like... which will then lead to a comment/review period. Since that will take some time and your PR is relatively small, I'll work on getting it merged soon.

from viceroy.

This would be a great addition. Would you be interested in opening a PR for this?

from viceroy.

I think I could try to find time for that if it would end up being accepted?

from viceroy.

@GeeWee I'm pretty sure that'd be the case 👍

from viceroy.

Okay, can you check? I'd hate to do the work and then have it languish :)

Do you have a proposal for the user-facing API in the TOML file? I'd like to lean against e.g. ConfigStores, but I think that's slightly harder, as that uses the format: "inline-toml" for keys defined inside the toml file.

from viceroy.

Sorry, looking at Viceroy I can see support for the file stanza for the secret store (#210) and kv store (originally added as path in #167 and later renamed for consistency in #206).

Is this what you wanted?

from viceroy.

I don't think so based at the documentation and the PR. I want to be able to specify a file with all my key-values, so e.g. a JSON object or similar, while the file property currently just allows me to specify the contents for a specific key - if I understand correctly?

from viceroy.

Ok, if you want all your key-values, that might require a bit of internal discussion as it is currently not part of the spec.
Sorry for the initial misunderstanding.

from viceroy.

Any way I can push on that discussion, or if you have an idea about a timeline? This would bee extremely handy for us, and I was maybe a little too eager, so I already did the work to implement it in #365 😅

from viceroy.

Related to (but distinct from) #359

from viceroy.

@kpfleming do you have a rough timeline for this redesign?

from viceroy.

There should be a post on our community forum in the next day or two, apologies for it taking much longer than planned to get the process started.

from viceroy.

I'm unable to find the community forum post - any chance you have a link handy? :)

from viceroy.

Hi @GeeWee –– apologies for the wait on this. I've just opened a community forum thread where we would welcome your input on fastly.toml: https://community.fastly.com/t/have-your-say-on-the-future-of-fastly-toml/2785

from viceroy.

Thanks! Just gotten back from vacation - I've written my thoughts there. I assume there's no timeline for when this will change, and that the PR I've proposed won't be accepted until then?

from viceroy.