Fix linter for Consul #370
Conversation
The ../roles/consul path was previously excluded from ansible-lint checks, but it is no longer necessary as the issue it was addressing has been resolved.
…dead_Servers` to `consul_autopilot_cleanup_dead_servers` for consistency The variable name `consul_autopilot_cleanup_dead_Servers` has been changed to `consul_autopilot_cleanup_dead_servers` to improve consistency with the naming conventions used in the rest of the codebase.
The jinja2 brackets in the when statement are unnecessary and can be removed. This commit removes them to improve readability and consistency with other tasks in the playbook.
…event silent errors The `set -o pipefail` option was added to the shell command to prevent silent errors that may occur when the `grep` command fails to find the "encrypt" key in the `config.json` file. This ensures that any errors that occur during the execution of the command are caught and reported.
|
Hello @vitabaks, I have a question regarding the Consul role. I was wondering if this role has been tested with Molecule ? Based on my own investigation, I didn't find indications that this is the case, but I wanted to make sure I'm not missing something. Could you confirm whether this is correct or not ? Thank you in advance for your time and your help. |
|
@ThomasSanson That's right, I haven't added this scheme to the Molecule tests yet. I have an idea to add a consul schema test to the daily tests ( Where one version of the Linux distribution will be deployed in the scheme with Etcd the second version of Consul. What do you think? |
|
I agree with your suggestion to add a consul schema test to the daily tests. However, I believe we could also benefit from adding Molecule scenarios, just like what has been done for the default and postgrespro scenarios. Thus, I would lean towards adding a "consul" or Type C scenario. These scenarios would be very helpful in testing and verifying different configurations and environments. Regarding the Github Action Matrix, I will need to look into it. Without it, maintaining multiple scenarios could become challenging. We can merge this pull request if you wish. Afterward, we could open a new issue to discuss and work on adding the Type C scenario. This will keep the discussions organized and make progress tracking easier. |
No description provided.