feat(static-site): allow optional S3 bucket prefix for static site origin

[nacholiya]

Summary

Adds support for an optional bucket_prefix variable to allow serving static site content from a specific prefix inside the S3 bucket.

Changes

Added bucket_prefix variable

Updated CloudFront origin configuration to support prefix using origin_path

Backward Compatibility

If bucket_prefix is empty (default), the module behaves exactly as before and serves content from the root of the bucket.

Related Issue

Fixes #12

[Script47]

bucket_prefix might imply a prefix being added to the bucket itself.

Any other names you can think of?

[nacholiya]

Good catch 👍 Renamed bucket_prefix to origin_path to better align with CloudFront terminology and avoid confusion.

[Script47]

origin_path is much better.

I've been mulling this change over for the last couple of days and have concluded that the real benefit of this change will be seen if you're able to reuse S3 buckets.

Currently, the module always creates the S3 bucket but if you could pass it an existing bucket alongside the origin_path it would allow you setup static sites where the source files can be organised neatly under a single bucket e.g.

• mysite.com -> mysite/root/index.html (bucket/prefix)
• subdomain.mysite.com -> mysite/subdomain.mysite.com/index.html
• another.mysite.com -> mysite/another.mysite.com/index.html

[nacholiya]

Great suggestion 👍 This makes a lot of sense, especially for reusing a single S3 bucket across multiple sites.

I’ll work on adding support for using an existing bucket alongside origin_path.

[nacholiya]

Added support for using an existing S3 bucket via existing_bucket_name while preserving current behavior when not provided 👍

[Script47]

@nacholiya

I’d approach it like this:

• Use the existing bucket_name variable to specify the bucket name
• Add an additional boolean flag, create_bucket, defaulting to true, which can be toggled to determine whether the module should create a new bucket or use an existing one

To me, this is more idiomatic as it provides a single source for the bucket name and an explicit, toggleable flag to control the behaviour.

Of course, you'll need to tweak the logic elsewhere too.

[nacholiya]

That makes sense 👍 Using bucket_name with a create_bucket flag is definitely cleaner and more flexible.

I’ll refactor the implementation accordingly.

[nacholiya]

Updated variable description to clarify behavior with create_bucket 👍