troposphere VS NUKE

Under the IaC category, in July 2023, AWS added loops to CloudFormation, finally ticking a box the community has been asking for since troposphere. I suspect that, in combination with the Terraform licensing changes, it may keep people using CloudFormation for a while longer.

Because ECS Compose-X uses Troposphere, I was able to create a very light and simple python library(https://github.com/JohnPreston/troposphere-awscommunity-applicationautoscaling-scheduledaction) to distribute the resource for other Troposphere users to re-use.

Written in house, but the library troposphere is the primary component of how it is built. Example stacks are here.

I am kind of going off topic here, but isn't the point of being an SA to be created with code services to deliver solutions at scale that are cost-effective? How in the hell can you do that when you can't write a simple Python template that generates code at 50 times the rate you can manually? How can you ever be expected to deploy a serverless solution if you can't write any code yourself? There has to be some level of proficiency there.

Wouldn't using troposphere[1] be easier?

[1] https://github.com/cloudtools/troposphere

You might have seen some tutorials on how to set up S3 buckets using the AWS Console. This works fine, but I'm a firm believer of managing your resources with code. I've chosen the native solution of AWS, called AWS CloudFormation. This makes it easier to reproduce the setup if I ever need to tear it down of move it to another account or region. Below is the full CloudFormation template, I've used a framework called Troposphere, a Python library that creates CloudFormation.

For CF for example I no longer write template in yaml or shudders json, and instead I use troposphere.

refer : https://github.com/cloudtools/troposphere

Is it similar to Nuke?

Another thing I could recommend is to use something like Nuke build system to automate more complex tasks that aren't good fit for csproj using C# code (for example - publishing and zipping self-contained release of some service for specific platform using current date and time or commit hash as version number).

testcontainers and https://github.com/dotnet/Docker.DotNet are on my to-do list to try out, but just like with something like https://nuke.build/ i can't see the value other than that the config would be c# instead of some flavour of yaml.

We started using https://nuke.build/. Early days so can’t comment too much but it seems good so far.

I think you're giving a really bad example of what consumers should expect from open-source projects. This year I reworked the whole website, released several versions, did a huge chunk of development, and spoke at 5 events (with travel). This is the first significant gap in almost 6 years of continuous development. Maybe it's hard to imagine, but also maintainers sometimes face severe issues in their life. Comments like this don't make it any better.

Posting this here because I think only .NET people use Nuke (https://nuke.build/) to manage their build.