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

Allow glob in include statement paths #12497

Open
brad2014 opened this issue Jan 24, 2025 · 3 comments
Open

Allow glob in include statement paths #12497

brad2014 opened this issue Jan 24, 2025 · 3 comments

Comments

@brad2014
Copy link

brad2014 commented Jan 24, 2025

Description

To create a compose environment that allows for plugins/extensions, we would like to be able to say:

services:
  # common services for this designed environment

include: docker-compose.d/*.yml # admin selected plugins for this environment, loaded in alphabetical order 

Of course, because the order of inclusion may matter for certain compose environments (not all), the glob would be sorted, and admins would have the ability to name their drop-in files as is customary in traditional unix subsystems that support drop-ins (e.g. /etc/sysctl.d, /etc/grub.d, /etc/X11/xinit/xinitrc.d, etc) : 00-firstcompose.yml, 05-earlycompose.yml, 99-finalcompose.yml, etc.

@ndeloof
Copy link
Contributor

ndeloof commented Jan 24, 2025

docker compose -f doesn't support glob patterns, so I don't see any reason include would.

@brad2014
Copy link
Author

docker compose -f doesn't support glob patterns, so I don't see any reason include would.

Indeed, the feature request is for a feature that is not currently supported. The use case providing the reason for including it is described in the feature request, to allow for the creation of environments that permit plugins/extensions developed separately and dropped in at the option of the site admin.

Presumably, if this is considered a feature worth supporting, the -f flag could work similarly if the feature were implemented (although that is not part of this feature request, it wouldn't interfere with our use case).

If a decision was already made to consider and reject that use case, my apologies.

@ndeloof
Copy link
Contributor

ndeloof commented Jan 24, 2025

see #10857

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants