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

Deterministic OSCAL Writes #542

Closed
brandtkeller opened this issue Jul 16, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #553
Closed

Deterministic OSCAL Writes #542

brandtkeller opened this issue Jul 16, 2024 · 0 comments · Fixed by #553
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@brandtkeller
Copy link
Member

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

When lula performs a write (whether in isolation or with a merge) the models use of arrays lead to random ordering of objects.

As lula encourages the version control of OSCAL and the review of changes - it will become more pertinent that the changes reflect the modified lines and not mass-updates due to changing order of existing/not-modified items.

Describe the solution you'd like

  • Given an operation that performs oscal writes
  • When an oscal file is generated
  • Then the order for performing the same action is the same

Describe alternatives you've considered

No Alternatives

Additional context

Each model needs consideration for array use and performing a sort on some key.

lula generate component may be a good starting point given the easy identification of many nested objects.

@brandtkeller brandtkeller added the bug Something isn't working label Jul 16, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added the triage Awaiting triage from the team label Jul 16, 2024
@brandtkeller brandtkeller removed the triage Awaiting triage from the team label Jul 22, 2024
@brandtkeller brandtkeller self-assigned this Jul 23, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant