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

move process implementations to separate modules #668

Merged

Conversation

bobvanderlinden
Copy link
Contributor

As discussed on Discord this is a proposal implementation for splitting up the process-managers into separate modules.

I must say that this became a bit bigger than I initially anticipated, but it seemed like the refactorings were still useful and backwards-compatible.

There are a few todo's in here to propose further changes, but first wanted to get feedback on this proposal as-is.

While working on this I also felt it might be a good idea to move generating the Procfile and env-file into a pkgs.formats.procfile and pkgs.formats.envfile. That way these implementations can be reused, but do not need to reside as options (process-compose doesn't use them for instance, as do a number of other non-procfile-based process managers). Not really needed to worry about right now though.

@jlesquembre
Copy link
Contributor

jlesquembre commented Jul 5, 2023

@bobvanderlinden We need to keep the port and tui options in the CLI for process-compose:

process-compose = ''
${pkgs.process-compose}/bin/process-compose --config ${config.procfile} \
--port ''${PC_HTTP_PORT:-${toString config.process.process-compose.port}} \
--tui=''${PC_TUI_ENABLED:-${toString config.process.process-compose.tui}} up "$@" &
'';

I created a PR:
#700

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.

3 participants