pulumi-terraform-bridge
cue
Our great sponsors
pulumi-terraform-bridge | cue | |
---|---|---|
7 | 28 | |
180 | 3,181 | |
5.0% | - | |
9.7 | 9.1 | |
4 days ago | almost 3 years ago | |
Go | Go | |
Apache License 2.0 | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
pulumi-terraform-bridge
-
We are the Pulumi Engineering team - Ask us about our new products and features
GA: automatic token mapping and aliasing in the bridge, which we're now using to simplify the resources.go file in bridged providers
-
Converting Full Terraform Programs to Pulumi
Yes, pulumi is just wrapping terraform[1]. So you need to understand both the quirks of that and the quirks of pulumi. And I'm lazy so I just want to deal with one quirk at the time.
[1] https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi-terraform-bridge
-
Weird warning after running pulumi preview
After digging, I saw python libraries in my venv directory that is related to Terraform Bridge and the tool that was used to generate code - https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi-terraform-bridge
-
CDKTF
They have an open source tool that translates the TF providers into Pulumi providers, so people could continue to build updated providers - https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi-terraform-bridge
-
Terraform 1.0 Release
> If Pulumi didn't bless it, it doesn't exist in Pulumi's world.
That has not been my experience. I have personally ported a Sentry TF provider into Pulumi, and I will grant you that their docs and examples are bordering on active user hatred for exercising the process, but it does work:
https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi-terraform-bridge#adapting-a...
https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi-tf-provider-boilerplate#rea...
What mystifies me about that situation is that I do actually appreciate the amount of silliness that is required to avoid using Pulumi cloud: they are not financially incentivized to make that easy, but I'd guess a lot more folks would nope right out if they didn't make it possible
However, I would think they'd want to make ingesting a TF provider into Pulumi as smooth and reliable as possible, so they don't have people close their browser tab when they don't find a supported provider for Pulumi but it exists in TF
-
Is AWS Cloud Development Kit (CDK) right for you?
For provisioning infrastructure in AWS, there are other tools besides those provided by AWS themselves. This includes Terraform and Pulumi. Both of these are not tied to any particular public cloud provider, or not even to public cloud providers only. Any kind of Software-as-a-service (SaaS) provider that can provide some service or infrastructure via programming interfaces can in theory be provisioned by these tools. Terraform has a long list of providers, and Pulumi can use Terraform providers in addition to its providers.
-
For IaC: Pulumi or Terraform?
I think they might use their (pulumi-terraform-bridge)[https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi-terraform-bridge] to generate some of their provider code from the corresponding Terraform providers? (This page mentioned some of their "most interesting providers" are created like this)[https://www.pulumi.com/docs/intro/vs/terraform/#using-terraform-providers].
cue
- The Perfect Configuration Format? Try TypeScript
- YAML: It's Time to Move On
-
Ask HN: What you up to? (Who doesn't want to be hired?)
I'm continuing to work on https://concise-encoding.org which is a new security-conscious ad-hoc encoding format to replace JSON/XML and friends. I've been at it for 3 years so far and am close to a release.
In a nutshell:
- Edit in text, transmit in binary. One can be seamlessly converted to the other, but binary is far more efficient for processing, storage and transmission, while text is better for humans to read and edit (which happens far less often than the other things).
- Secure by design: Everything is tightly specced and accounted for so that there aren't differences between implementations that can be exploited to compromise your system. https://github.com/kstenerud/concise-encoding/blob/master/ce...
- Real type support because coercing everything into strings sucks (and is another security risk and source of incompatibilities).
XML had a good run but was replaced by JSON which was a big improvement. JSON also had a good run but it's time for it to retire now that the landscape has changed even further: Security and efficiency are the desires of today, and JSON provides neither.
I've got the spec nailed down and can finally see the light at the end of the tunnel for the reference implementation in golang. I still need to come up with a system for schemas, but I'm hoping that https://cuelang.org will fit the bill.
-
No YAML
Has anyone taken a look at Cue who can share any experiences?
https://cuelang.org/
It's mentioned on the site as an alternative to Yaml. Recently watched (~half of) this intro to it: https://youtu.be/fR_yApIf6jU
- Ask HN: Is there a good way to run integration tests on Kubernetes?
-
Cue: A new language for data validation
the most interesting summary explanation of cue lang and its differences is from a bug filing - https://github.com/cuelang/cue/issues/33
>CUE is a bit different from the languages used in linguistics and more tailored to the general configuration issue as we've seen it at Google. But under the hood it adheres strictly to the concepts and principles of these approaches and we have been careful not to make the same mistakes made in BCL (which then were copied in all its offshoots). It also means that CUE can benefit from 30 years of research on this topic. For instance, under the hood, CUE uses a first-order unification algorithm, allowing us to build template extractors based on anti-unification (see issue #7 and #15), something that is not very meaningful or even possible with languages like BCL and Jsonnet.
-
CMake proposal: Unified way of describing dependencies of a project
I agree with you. Personally, I think Cue is much better than either YAML, TOML or JSON because it adds the concept of types to the idea of describing configuration.
-
Cloud Infrastructure as SQL
true, but the tooling and workflow remains the same.
Not sure of any tool that could abstract the details sufficiently to be widely adopted. There is just too much nuance in cloud config.
I'm exploring using CUE (https://cuelang.org) to define TF resources, exporting as JSON for TF. So far it's much nicer
What are some alternatives?
Pulumi - Pulumi - Infrastructure as Code in any programming language. Build infrastructure intuitively on any cloud using familiar languages 🚀
terraform - Terraform enables you to safely and predictably create, change, and improve infrastructure. It is a source-available tool that codifies APIs into declarative configuration files that can be shared amongst team members, treated as code, edited, reviewed, and versioned.
terraform-ls - Terraform Language Server
dhall-lang - Maintainable configuration files
pulumi-provider-boilerplate - Boilerplate showing how to create a native Pulumi provider
jsonnet - Jsonnet - The data templating language
porter - Porter enables you to package your application artifact, client tools, configuration and deployment logic together as an installer that you can distribute, and install with a single command.
terraform-provider-spacelift - Terraform provider to interact with Spacelift
ytt - YAML templating tool that works on YAML structure instead of text
aws-cloudformation-res
starlark-rust - A Rust implementation of the Starlark language