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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

ci: Introduce PSRule suppression for individual rules/resources #3810

Draft
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

ci: Introduce PSRule suppression for individual rules/resources #3810

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e307ba3
test new suppression
eriqua Nov 19, 2024
2a7cf87
test 2 adhoc suppressions
eriqua Nov 19, 2024
d66a150
add module and reason
eriqua Nov 19, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
28 changes: 28 additions & 0 deletions avm/utilities/pipelines/staticValidation/psrule/.ps-rule/adhoc-suppress.Rule.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
---
# Synopsis: Suppress Rules for specific resources
apiVersion: github.com/microsoft/PSRule/v1
kind: SuppressionGroup
metadata:
name: "SuppressAdHoc"

# module: avm/ptn/virtual-machine-images/azure-image-builder
# reason: Image Templates do not currently support firewall enabled storage accounts
spec:
rule:
- Azure.Storage.Firewall
if:
name: "."
endsWith:
- "apvmiaibmin"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there something like contains?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I believe so. Would you prefer that?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would - simply because it may enable us to make it more robust / decrease the dependency on the specific name. Let's talk about this some time :)

---

# module: avm/res/sql/server
# reason: This module includes an input parameter object named keys, as per child module parameters naming convention and with no sensitive information in it
spec:
rule:
- Azure.Deployment.SecureParameter
if:
name: "."
endsWith:
- "test-sqlswaf"