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

Use source as the dst for go-getter #9

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

rowleyaj
Copy link

An md5 hash of the dst is used as the folder name on disk.

In hashicorp#1418 this was altered
to not be platform specific. The dst was changed from the source to a
key based on the module path. This was done so that terraform push
would work. This had the side affect that modules with the same source
would result in multiple downloads. This was acknowledged in the original
commit.

This is a simple way to have the key be based on source again.

Tested with terraform get and all works ok. With terraform get --update
the update is done multiple times as if the 1:1 mapping was still in
place.

An md5 hash of the dst is used as the folder name on disk.

In hashicorp#1418 this was altered
to not be platform specific. The dst was changed from the source to a
key based on the module path. This was done so that terraform push
would work. This had the side affect that modules with the same source
would result in multiple downloads. This was acknowledged in the original
commit.

This is a simple way to have the key be based on source again.

Tested with terraform get and all works ok. With terraform get --update
the update is done multiple times as if the 1:1 mapping was still in
place.
@scottcunningham
Copy link

SGTM

@josephholsten
Copy link

this'll need to be updated onto v0.6.14-ens at some point. also, should we be advocating a change to upstream?

@rowleyaj
Copy link
Author

Yeh I definitely think we should be advocating a change to upstream. This wouldn't be the change I'd recommend though as this reverts something that was deliberately decided.

I'm going to close this and branch off our latest.

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.

3 participants