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

"caddy add-package", "caddy remove-package", "caddy list-modules" could have a JSON out param to aid with SBOM and other factors #6550

Closed
gedw99 opened this issue Aug 29, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@gedw99
Copy link

gedw99 commented Aug 29, 2024

We could add JSON out on caddy add-package , caddy remove-package and caddy list-modules --packages --versions commands, so that we can do solid automation, to help have a good SBOM practices.

I often do this so that I know whats inside at all times, and pipe it to a file as meta data for all systems.

JSON seems like the defecto format.

Its also a good way to do higher level automations.

@mohammed90
Copy link
Member

Given this issue and the others (#6549 and #6548, and the linked infogulch/xtemplate#19), I think you're using the wrong tool for the job. The add-package and remove-package are not build systems to expect them to produce SBOMs. The 2 commands use our build-server (same used by download page) for the builds, which comes without any SLA. We also run the risk of reinventing goreleaser, which does everything you want and more.

If you want to achieve automation, use xcaddy (standalone or in combination with goreleaser) to control your builds. Baking everything into Caddy is the wrong way to go about it.

@mholt mholt closed this as completed Sep 2, 2024
@mholt
Copy link
Member

mholt commented Sep 2, 2024

Yeah, I think I agree; I haven't intended those commands to automate builds, not in this way. There are better ways to do it with xcaddy.

@gedw99
Copy link
Author

gedw99 commented Sep 2, 2024

Got it . Thanks all for the steeeing !!

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants