Bitwarden

[georgejung]

If you're reporting an issue with execution of the Ansible-NAS playbook, please run the playbook with -vvv, and ideally isolate the problematic part with --tags <ansible tag> where possible.

Describe the bug
The bitwarden tasks traefik has not been updated to the latest. Here's what I used, for whatever it's worth. I think I used the right port - it works.
I was going to mention the memory issue as well but you got it yesterday ;)

labels:
traefik.enable: "{{ bitwarden_available_externally }}"
traefik.http.routers.bitwarden.rule: "Host({{ bitwarden_hostname }}.{{ ansible_nas_domain }})"
traefik.http.routers.bitwarden.tls.certresolver: "letsencrypt"
traefik.http.routers.bitwarden.tls.domains[0].main: "{{ ansible_nas_domain }}"
traefik.http.routers.bitwarden.tls.domains[0].sans: "*.{{ ansible_nas_domain }}"
traefik.http.services.bitwarden.loadbalancer.server.port: "80"
memory: "{{ bitwarden_memory }}"
restart_policy: unless-stopped

[sofute]

I experienced the same issue. Used your fix and it worked. Thanks

[elliotpryde]

This was annoying - thought I'd broke something 🤦

Been using this repo for about a year now and regression seem commonplace - some basic testing would be good, but I've no idea how you'd test an ansible playbook.

Thanks for pointing this out.

[davestephens]

Testing the playbook's syntax is easy - this is done now. Testing it runs with minimal containers enabled is also easy, and done, Orchestrating a useful test of every container is reasonably hard, given limited resources on free testing hosts. Testing all of the containers run, and that external connectivity works with Traefik enabled - is near-on impossible due to the nature of the CI infrastructure and the inability to register a working DNS name against it. If you have a solution to this, or a PR to fix the bug you found, feel free to add something constructive...

…

On Thu, 1 Apr 2021, 19:40 Elliot Pryde, ***@***.***> wrote: This was annoying - thought I'd broke something 🤦 Been using this repo for about a year now and regression seem commonplace - some basic testing would be good, but I've no idea how you'd test an ansible playbook. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#430 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFDGMCJZOFHA35XNYXXIJ3TGS4ZDANCNFSM4YFUX5BA> .

[elliotpryde]

Testing the playbook's syntax is easy - this is done now. Testing it runs with minimal containers enabled is also easy, and done, Orchestrating a useful test of every container is reasonably hard, given limited resources on free testing hosts. Testing all of the containers run, and that external connectivity works with Traefik enabled - is near-on impossible due to the nature of the CI infrastructure and the inability to register a working DNS name against it. If you have a solution to this, or a PR to fix the bug you found, feel free to add something constructive...
…
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021, 19:40 Elliot Pryde, @.***> wrote: This was annoying - thought I'd broke something 🤦 Been using this repo for about a year now and regression seem commonplace - some basic testing would be good, but I've no idea how you'd test an ansible playbook. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#430 (comment)>, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFDGMCJZOFHA35XNYXXIJ3TGS4ZDANCNFSM4YFUX5BA .

Sorry if I sounded a bit negative, but this one was frustrating.

There's already been a PR waiting for review for about a few weeks now, so it'd be great if someone with the necessary permissions could get that merged...