Strict yaml validation?

[ahmetb]

I have mistakes in my docker-compose.yml file such as mistyped keys (fooooocommand):

consul:
  fooooocommand: -server -node master2 -advertise 10.0.0.6 -join 10.0.0.4 -join 10.0.0.5
  image: progrium/consul
  ports:
  - 8300:8300

libcompose seems to be ignoring them, however docker-compose does strict validation and errors out. We probably need the same behavior here.

[thaJeztah]

This PR was just merged in compose, and performs validation of the docker-compose.yml; docker/compose#1808, could be useful when implementing the same in libcompose.

[ahmetb]

Yes, jsonschema is most certainly a legit solution here as well and it has some good golang libs too.

[ibuildthecloud]

That's a great idea if we can share schema files. I'll look for a Json schema validator in go, hopefully we don't have to write one.

[ibuildthecloud]

But generally yes I agree with this issue. We should be stricter because I mistype things myself all the time.

[ibuildthecloud]

Okay, found this https://github.com/xeipuuv/gojsonschema. It's on github, it has a common name, so I think that means its production ready :)

[thaJeztah]

Okay, found this https://github.com/xeipuuv/gojsonschema. It's on github, it has a common name, so I think that means its production ready :)

It doesn't have tags or releases yet, so we may want to check that with the author of that project.

[ahmetb]

it'll probably just work :) why don't we give it a shot? anyone?

[ibuildthecloud]

I'm all for it, worst case scenario is doesn't work. We got nothing to loose :)

[bfirsh]

See also: docker/compose#2089

[joshwget]

Working on a PR for this, I think xeipuuv/gojsonschema will be sufficient. I've ran into a few small bugs(xeipuuv/gojsonschema#72, xeipuuv/gojsonschema#73, xeipuuv/gojsonschema#74), but I think I can include some band-aids to get around them until they're fixed.

[dnephin]

@joshwget I just want to make sure that you saw the above message. We want to use the same schema from compose (see the linked issue docker/compose#2089). I wouldn't recommend creating a new schema. For now copying it into the repo, or curling it as part of a build step will have to do. We'll make it available in a more permanent way soon enough.

[joshwget]

@dnephin I did see it, thanks! I'm currently developing with that schema.