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

add initial site resource #56

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

BeryJu
Copy link

@BeryJu BeryJu commented Sep 9, 2024

#39

Add initial resource for creating a Site. Doesn't have too many settings as most of them are covered by netlify_site_build_settings. Probably some clunky code as I've mainly used SDKv2 instead of TF Framework

@BeryJu BeryJu requested a review from ramonsnir as a code owner September 9, 2024 21:50
@ramonsnir
Copy link
Member

Thanks @BeryJu for contributing!

I will review this later, and I need to discuss with a few people internally to make sure this is future-proof as the site resource is very complicated.

Have you tried to use this resource for your own account? Can you share a wider example of how you used it? Obviously, with sensitive information redacted.

@BeryJu
Copy link
Author

BeryJu commented Sep 9, 2024

Thanks @BeryJu for contributing!

I will review this later, and I need to discuss with a few people internally to make sure this is future-proof as the site resource is very complicated.

Yeah that's fair, I assumed that it wasn't going to be simple but hopefully #39 can be done a bit faster

Have you tried to use this resource for your own account? Can you share a wider example of how you used it? Obviously, with sensitive information redacted.

I haven't tried this with my real account yet, but I have tried it with a test netlify account (both the acceptance tests and a separate test setup) and it does create the site correctly. The main idea for using this is with @goauthentik where we'd like to automate having a site for each release which we currently do with branch domains but that is not quite flexible enough. (We currently have 40 releases that would map to 40 sites but this will increase in the future)

@ramonsnir
Copy link
Member

See my comment here: #39 (comment)

We currently believe that this approach would create sites with limited functionality, so we're holding off until we have a solution (or we are sure that sites starting this way can be upgraded/hydrated).

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.

2 participants