It would be useful to be able to validate the various configuration examples we have in the docs in a few ways:
- Dry run at least
- StrictYAML or other linting
Potentially we can do this on a per-PR basis so that it only tests the changed files and/or we can also do a full run, e.g. for a release.
I'm not sure if there are any good tools for doing this from Markdown/Gitbook, we can obviously just use some scripting to extract the config sections then poke that into the appropriate tool as well. It would be nice to get some kind of annotation similar to ReviewDog that gives you the failing line too.
We can potentially extend this as well to ensure the configuration parameters table is complete by checking it against the output from fluent-bit -i|-F|-o <plugin> --help or similar.
It would be useful to be able to validate the various configuration examples we have in the docs in a few ways:
Potentially we can do this on a per-PR basis so that it only tests the changed files and/or we can also do a full run, e.g. for a release.
I'm not sure if there are any good tools for doing this from Markdown/Gitbook, we can obviously just use some scripting to extract the config sections then poke that into the appropriate tool as well. It would be nice to get some kind of annotation similar to ReviewDog that gives you the failing line too.
We can potentially extend this as well to ensure the configuration parameters table is complete by checking it against the output from
fluent-bit -i|-F|-o <plugin> --helpor similar.