Skip to content

Conversation

@dudymas
Copy link

@dudymas dudymas commented Nov 14, 2025

what

  • allow stack id's to have formatted names

why

  • for multi-instance stacks, it can help to organize them by keeping the workspace as a prefix rather than suffix
  • some folks prefer a different pattern (or maybe even separator) for stack id slugs

# Following source doesn't work in most setups
ignored:
- SC1090
- SC1091
Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this was generated by trunk when I ran trunk upgrade

Copy link
Member

@Gowiem Gowiem left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@dudymas this looks great overall, well done!

I have one issue I want to work through before we move this forward and it's the problem of supporting nested directories in this child module, which I'm starting to regret as I believe that is adding some unnecessary complexity in multiple areas of our code.

I'd like to chat with you and @oycyc who originally introduced that idea and see if that is actually an important feature or something we can remove / not continue to build workarounds for. Let's chat about that tomorrow and keep this PR on hold until we discuss -- Thanks!

module => {
for file, content in files :
file => (
file == var.common_config_file ? null :
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you need this check if you have the if file != var.common_config_file on the for?

@Gowiem
Copy link
Member

Gowiem commented Jan 9, 2026

@dudymas @oycyc as a follow up to our retro earlier today, I want to go full circle on this PR and introduce a breaking change that fixes this bad name formatting instead of just introducing a backwards compatible template variable that we can use to fix it.

I would like to do that next week alongside @gberenice's PR (#104) which I think should also introduce a breaking change.

I'll schedule 30 minutes next week so the 4 of us can get on the same page and then execute what we need to do!

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.

4 participants