Sub Packs

[mickmcgrath13]

It might be nice to be able to separate a pack into sub-packs. These sub-packs would still be part of a pack and would allow devs to break up a service into smaller logical groups.

One good example that could potentially benefit from this is the AWS Pack.

It has so many actions, and maybe each service could be its own sub-pack?

[nmaludy]

I think this is related to #3336

[warrenvw]

@mickmcgrath13 In #community, you also mentioned something to the effect that sub-packs could support permissions. Could you add some details if this is a feature you think we should consider?

[mickmcgrath13]

I'm thinking of something like:

packs/aws
  - acm
    - actions
    - aliases
  - apigateway
    - actions
    - sensors
    - etc

not a fully formed thought (with that, you couldn't have a sub-pack called "actions" for example)...

@nmaludy With that info, are you still thinking it's related to #3336 ? If so, maybe explain a bit more how they're related?

[nmaludy]

@mickmcgrath13 I'm thinking that the "sub-packs" would actually be full fledged packs themselves (and installed independently if desired).

With dependency resolution the "super pack" or "parent pack" can declare a bunch of "sub packs" as dependencies. Example:

---
packs:
  aws_aaa:
    url: https://github.com/StackStorm-Exchange/stackstorm-aws_aaa.git
  aws_bbb:
    url: https://github.com/StackStorm-Exchange/stackstorm-aws_bbb.git
  aws_ccc:
    url: https://github.com/StackStorm-Exchange/stackstorm-aws_ccc.git
  aws:
    url: https://github.com/StackStorm-Exchange/stackstorm-aws.git
    dependencies:
      - aws_aaa
      - aws_bbb
      - aws_ccc

[warrenvw]

@nmaludy While I have't thought everything through in detail, from a 10,000 foot view things look cool. I like how "super-packs" enable certain other features such as dependency resolution. I assume that any pack can be a "super-pack" in a recursive kind of way? Hmm...

I further assume each url above can specify a pinned version of each repo as necessary.

[mickmcgrath13]

Oh, I see. I like that concept for sure! We use a similar concept for CanJS/DoneJS, and it helps a lot with things like maintainability and upgrades.

It's getting close to package.json format, though. Would it make sense to just use that or something like it, or no?

[mickmcgrath13]

@warrenvw For the permissions, I was thinking that it could be nice to, for example, restrict users of mere-mortals to see aws/aws-aaa sub-pack, and godly-folk could see everything.

idk, I also have little experience with ST2's permissions, so it's entirely possible that you can already accomplish stuff like that and that the permissions aspect of the sub-packs concept isn't entirely valid?

¯_(ツ)_/¯