Skip to content

Feature/add features#54

Open
d-sooter wants to merge 4 commits intoengswee:mainfrom
PaulNetze:feature/add-features
Open

Feature/add features#54
d-sooter wants to merge 4 commits intoengswee:mainfrom
PaulNetze:feature/add-features

Conversation

@d-sooter
Copy link

@d-sooter d-sooter commented Feb 2, 2026

No description provided.

Signed-off-by: David Sooter <david.sooter@cpars.de>
@d-sooter d-sooter force-pushed the feature/add-features branch from 04a2a28 to 1c49b6a Compare February 2, 2026 10:02
d-sooter and others added 3 commits February 2, 2026 11:17
Signed-off-by: David Sooter <david.sooter@cpars.de>
Signed-off-by: David Sooter <david.sooter@cpars.de>
Signed-off-by: David Sooter <david.sooter@cpars.de>
@d-sooter d-sooter force-pushed the feature/add-features branch from 196d409 to d6c7084 Compare February 2, 2026 10:18
@d-sooter
Copy link
Author

d-sooter commented Feb 2, 2026

Add pd support and access via config

@d-sooter
Copy link
Author

d-sooter commented Feb 2, 2026

add binaries

@engswee
Copy link
Owner

engswee commented Feb 2, 2026

Hi @d-sooter ... WOW! I didn't see this coming. Thank you for your interest in this project and willingness to contribute to it.

However, to be honest, this is quite a big PR that you have submitted and it is not going to be easy or straightforward to review it and merge it into the codebase. Maybe you may have missed reading up the contribution guidelines first.

For something this big, I would have preferred to discuss about it first so that the PR process would have been smoother.

I haven't looked at all your changes, but at a glance, there are a lot of changes across many areas which is going to make it a challenge for me to review it in a timely and efficient manner.

I hope you understand, FlashPipe is a stable solution that is widely used and a PR this big is difficult for me to verify that it has not broken any of the existing parts.

I'll need some time to look through what you did and think about how we can proceed. In the meantime, I think it's also worth it that you read up the contribution guidelines and reconsider if you can break it up into smaller independent PRs to simplify the submission process.

@nimbit-software
Copy link

nimbit-software commented Feb 4, 2026

Hi there. I originally forked it because we needed a few other features and you already done such great work on this. I actually handnt planned to create the pr it sort of just happened :-)

I would be happy to discuss it with you and break it up into parts.

The main areas i made changes on are

  • partner directory
  • improvements to the deployments (parallel)
  • configuration endpoint alloying users to configure iflows and redeploy them.
  • deployment via configuration files with parameter overrides ( allows duplication of iflow with different configurations) this allows us to have a base iflow and make changes there and redeploy different instances with different configs.
  • ability to be able to pass in just a config file to the cli (yaml). This allows us to not have to pass everything via cli but rather just reference a config file.
  • improved binary build (to be used without docker)

Like i said lots of this is what we needed for our usecase and might not be right for everyone. Buuut if there are parts that make sense we can talk about breaking them down and consolidating them.

I can the break the features down into smaller prs.

Cheers

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.

5 participants