2018-06-26 20:14:03 +02:00
|
|
|
// Code generated by protoc-gen-go. DO NOT EDIT.
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
// source: analyzer.proto
|
|
|
|
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
package pulumirpc
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
import proto "github.com/golang/protobuf/proto"
|
|
|
|
import fmt "fmt"
|
|
|
|
import math "math"
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
import empty "github.com/golang/protobuf/ptypes/empty"
|
|
|
|
import _struct "github.com/golang/protobuf/ptypes/struct"
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
import (
|
|
|
|
context "golang.org/x/net/context"
|
|
|
|
grpc "google.golang.org/grpc"
|
|
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Reference imports to suppress errors if they are not otherwise used.
|
|
|
|
var _ = proto.Marshal
|
|
|
|
var _ = fmt.Errorf
|
|
|
|
var _ = math.Inf
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// This is a compile-time assertion to ensure that this generated file
|
|
|
|
// is compatible with the proto package it is being compiled against.
|
|
|
|
// A compilation error at this line likely means your copy of the
|
|
|
|
// proto package needs to be updated.
|
|
|
|
const _ = proto.ProtoPackageIsVersion2 // please upgrade the proto package
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
type AnalyzeRequest struct {
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
Type string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=type" json:"type,omitempty"`
|
|
|
|
Properties *_struct.Struct `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=properties" json:"properties,omitempty"`
|
|
|
|
XXX_NoUnkeyedLiteral struct{} `json:"-"`
|
|
|
|
XXX_unrecognized []byte `json:"-"`
|
|
|
|
XXX_sizecache int32 `json:"-"`
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeRequest) Reset() { *m = AnalyzeRequest{} }
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeRequest) String() string { return proto.CompactTextString(m) }
|
|
|
|
func (*AnalyzeRequest) ProtoMessage() {}
|
|
|
|
func (*AnalyzeRequest) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
|
|
|
|
return fileDescriptor_analyzer_4d94ca02b59f2385, []int{0}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeRequest) XXX_Unmarshal(b []byte) error {
|
|
|
|
return xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeRequest.Unmarshal(m, b)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeRequest) XXX_Marshal(b []byte, deterministic bool) ([]byte, error) {
|
|
|
|
return xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeRequest.Marshal(b, m, deterministic)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (dst *AnalyzeRequest) XXX_Merge(src proto.Message) {
|
|
|
|
xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeRequest.Merge(dst, src)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeRequest) XXX_Size() int {
|
|
|
|
return xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeRequest.Size(m)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeRequest) XXX_DiscardUnknown() {
|
|
|
|
xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeRequest.DiscardUnknown(m)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
var xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeRequest proto.InternalMessageInfo
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
|
Make more progress on the new deployment model
This change restructures a lot more pertaining to deployments, snapshots,
environments, and the like.
The most notable change is that the notion of a deploy.Source is introduced,
which splits the responsibility between the deploy.Plan -- which simply
understands how to compute and carry out deployment plans -- and the idea
of something that can produce new objects on-demand during deployment.
The primary such implementation is evalSource, which encapsulates an
interpreter and takes a package, args, and config map, and proceeds to run
the interpreter in a distinct goroutine. It synchronizes as needed to
poke and prod the interpreter along its path to create new resource objects.
There are two other sources, however. First, a nullSource, which simply
refuses to create new objects. This can be handy when writing isolated
tests but is also used to simulate the "empty" environment as necessary to
do a complete teardown of the target environment. Second, a fixedSource,
which takes a pre-computed array of objects, and hands those, in order, to
the planning engine; this is mostly useful as a testing technique.
Boatloads of code is now changed and updated in the various CLI commands.
This further chugs along towards pulumi/lumi#90. The end is in sight.
2017-06-10 20:50:47 +02:00
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeRequest) GetType() string {
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
if m != nil {
|
|
|
|
return m.Type
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return ""
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeRequest) GetProperties() *_struct.Struct {
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
if m != nil {
|
|
|
|
return m.Properties
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return nil
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Make more progress on the new deployment model
This change restructures a lot more pertaining to deployments, snapshots,
environments, and the like.
The most notable change is that the notion of a deploy.Source is introduced,
which splits the responsibility between the deploy.Plan -- which simply
understands how to compute and carry out deployment plans -- and the idea
of something that can produce new objects on-demand during deployment.
The primary such implementation is evalSource, which encapsulates an
interpreter and takes a package, args, and config map, and proceeds to run
the interpreter in a distinct goroutine. It synchronizes as needed to
poke and prod the interpreter along its path to create new resource objects.
There are two other sources, however. First, a nullSource, which simply
refuses to create new objects. This can be handy when writing isolated
tests but is also used to simulate the "empty" environment as necessary to
do a complete teardown of the target environment. Second, a fixedSource,
which takes a pre-computed array of objects, and hands those, in order, to
the planning engine; this is mostly useful as a testing technique.
Boatloads of code is now changed and updated in the various CLI commands.
This further chugs along towards pulumi/lumi#90. The end is in sight.
2017-06-10 20:50:47 +02:00
|
|
|
type AnalyzeResponse struct {
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
Failures []*AnalyzeFailure `protobuf:"bytes,1,rep,name=failures" json:"failures,omitempty"`
|
|
|
|
XXX_NoUnkeyedLiteral struct{} `json:"-"`
|
|
|
|
XXX_unrecognized []byte `json:"-"`
|
|
|
|
XXX_sizecache int32 `json:"-"`
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeResponse) Reset() { *m = AnalyzeResponse{} }
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeResponse) String() string { return proto.CompactTextString(m) }
|
|
|
|
func (*AnalyzeResponse) ProtoMessage() {}
|
|
|
|
func (*AnalyzeResponse) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
|
|
|
|
return fileDescriptor_analyzer_4d94ca02b59f2385, []int{1}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeResponse) XXX_Unmarshal(b []byte) error {
|
|
|
|
return xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeResponse.Unmarshal(m, b)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeResponse) XXX_Marshal(b []byte, deterministic bool) ([]byte, error) {
|
|
|
|
return xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeResponse.Marshal(b, m, deterministic)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (dst *AnalyzeResponse) XXX_Merge(src proto.Message) {
|
|
|
|
xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeResponse.Merge(dst, src)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeResponse) XXX_Size() int {
|
|
|
|
return xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeResponse.Size(m)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeResponse) XXX_DiscardUnknown() {
|
|
|
|
xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeResponse.DiscardUnknown(m)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
var xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeResponse proto.InternalMessageInfo
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
|
Make more progress on the new deployment model
This change restructures a lot more pertaining to deployments, snapshots,
environments, and the like.
The most notable change is that the notion of a deploy.Source is introduced,
which splits the responsibility between the deploy.Plan -- which simply
understands how to compute and carry out deployment plans -- and the idea
of something that can produce new objects on-demand during deployment.
The primary such implementation is evalSource, which encapsulates an
interpreter and takes a package, args, and config map, and proceeds to run
the interpreter in a distinct goroutine. It synchronizes as needed to
poke and prod the interpreter along its path to create new resource objects.
There are two other sources, however. First, a nullSource, which simply
refuses to create new objects. This can be handy when writing isolated
tests but is also used to simulate the "empty" environment as necessary to
do a complete teardown of the target environment. Second, a fixedSource,
which takes a pre-computed array of objects, and hands those, in order, to
the planning engine; this is mostly useful as a testing technique.
Boatloads of code is now changed and updated in the various CLI commands.
This further chugs along towards pulumi/lumi#90. The end is in sight.
2017-06-10 20:50:47 +02:00
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeResponse) GetFailures() []*AnalyzeFailure {
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
if m != nil {
|
|
|
|
return m.Failures
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return nil
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Make more progress on the new deployment model
This change restructures a lot more pertaining to deployments, snapshots,
environments, and the like.
The most notable change is that the notion of a deploy.Source is introduced,
which splits the responsibility between the deploy.Plan -- which simply
understands how to compute and carry out deployment plans -- and the idea
of something that can produce new objects on-demand during deployment.
The primary such implementation is evalSource, which encapsulates an
interpreter and takes a package, args, and config map, and proceeds to run
the interpreter in a distinct goroutine. It synchronizes as needed to
poke and prod the interpreter along its path to create new resource objects.
There are two other sources, however. First, a nullSource, which simply
refuses to create new objects. This can be handy when writing isolated
tests but is also used to simulate the "empty" environment as necessary to
do a complete teardown of the target environment. Second, a fixedSource,
which takes a pre-computed array of objects, and hands those, in order, to
the planning engine; this is mostly useful as a testing technique.
Boatloads of code is now changed and updated in the various CLI commands.
This further chugs along towards pulumi/lumi#90. The end is in sight.
2017-06-10 20:50:47 +02:00
|
|
|
type AnalyzeFailure struct {
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
Property string `protobuf:"bytes,1,opt,name=property" json:"property,omitempty"`
|
|
|
|
Reason string `protobuf:"bytes,2,opt,name=reason" json:"reason,omitempty"`
|
|
|
|
XXX_NoUnkeyedLiteral struct{} `json:"-"`
|
|
|
|
XXX_unrecognized []byte `json:"-"`
|
|
|
|
XXX_sizecache int32 `json:"-"`
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeFailure) Reset() { *m = AnalyzeFailure{} }
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeFailure) String() string { return proto.CompactTextString(m) }
|
|
|
|
func (*AnalyzeFailure) ProtoMessage() {}
|
|
|
|
func (*AnalyzeFailure) Descriptor() ([]byte, []int) {
|
|
|
|
return fileDescriptor_analyzer_4d94ca02b59f2385, []int{2}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeFailure) XXX_Unmarshal(b []byte) error {
|
|
|
|
return xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeFailure.Unmarshal(m, b)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeFailure) XXX_Marshal(b []byte, deterministic bool) ([]byte, error) {
|
|
|
|
return xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeFailure.Marshal(b, m, deterministic)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (dst *AnalyzeFailure) XXX_Merge(src proto.Message) {
|
|
|
|
xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeFailure.Merge(dst, src)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeFailure) XXX_Size() int {
|
|
|
|
return xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeFailure.Size(m)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeFailure) XXX_DiscardUnknown() {
|
|
|
|
xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeFailure.DiscardUnknown(m)
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
var xxx_messageInfo_AnalyzeFailure proto.InternalMessageInfo
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
|
Make more progress on the new deployment model
This change restructures a lot more pertaining to deployments, snapshots,
environments, and the like.
The most notable change is that the notion of a deploy.Source is introduced,
which splits the responsibility between the deploy.Plan -- which simply
understands how to compute and carry out deployment plans -- and the idea
of something that can produce new objects on-demand during deployment.
The primary such implementation is evalSource, which encapsulates an
interpreter and takes a package, args, and config map, and proceeds to run
the interpreter in a distinct goroutine. It synchronizes as needed to
poke and prod the interpreter along its path to create new resource objects.
There are two other sources, however. First, a nullSource, which simply
refuses to create new objects. This can be handy when writing isolated
tests but is also used to simulate the "empty" environment as necessary to
do a complete teardown of the target environment. Second, a fixedSource,
which takes a pre-computed array of objects, and hands those, in order, to
the planning engine; this is mostly useful as a testing technique.
Boatloads of code is now changed and updated in the various CLI commands.
This further chugs along towards pulumi/lumi#90. The end is in sight.
2017-06-10 20:50:47 +02:00
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeFailure) GetProperty() string {
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
if m != nil {
|
|
|
|
return m.Property
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return ""
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Make more progress on the new deployment model
This change restructures a lot more pertaining to deployments, snapshots,
environments, and the like.
The most notable change is that the notion of a deploy.Source is introduced,
which splits the responsibility between the deploy.Plan -- which simply
understands how to compute and carry out deployment plans -- and the idea
of something that can produce new objects on-demand during deployment.
The primary such implementation is evalSource, which encapsulates an
interpreter and takes a package, args, and config map, and proceeds to run
the interpreter in a distinct goroutine. It synchronizes as needed to
poke and prod the interpreter along its path to create new resource objects.
There are two other sources, however. First, a nullSource, which simply
refuses to create new objects. This can be handy when writing isolated
tests but is also used to simulate the "empty" environment as necessary to
do a complete teardown of the target environment. Second, a fixedSource,
which takes a pre-computed array of objects, and hands those, in order, to
the planning engine; this is mostly useful as a testing technique.
Boatloads of code is now changed and updated in the various CLI commands.
This further chugs along towards pulumi/lumi#90. The end is in sight.
2017-06-10 20:50:47 +02:00
|
|
|
func (m *AnalyzeFailure) GetReason() string {
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
if m != nil {
|
|
|
|
return m.Reason
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return ""
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
func init() {
|
2017-09-22 04:18:21 +02:00
|
|
|
proto.RegisterType((*AnalyzeRequest)(nil), "pulumirpc.AnalyzeRequest")
|
|
|
|
proto.RegisterType((*AnalyzeResponse)(nil), "pulumirpc.AnalyzeResponse")
|
|
|
|
proto.RegisterType((*AnalyzeFailure)(nil), "pulumirpc.AnalyzeFailure")
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Reference imports to suppress errors if they are not otherwise used.
|
|
|
|
var _ context.Context
|
|
|
|
var _ grpc.ClientConn
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// This is a compile-time assertion to ensure that this generated file
|
|
|
|
// is compatible with the grpc package it is being compiled against.
|
|
|
|
const _ = grpc.SupportPackageIsVersion4
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-30 01:14:49 +02:00
|
|
|
// Client API for Analyzer service
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
type AnalyzerClient interface {
|
Make more progress on the new deployment model
This change restructures a lot more pertaining to deployments, snapshots,
environments, and the like.
The most notable change is that the notion of a deploy.Source is introduced,
which splits the responsibility between the deploy.Plan -- which simply
understands how to compute and carry out deployment plans -- and the idea
of something that can produce new objects on-demand during deployment.
The primary such implementation is evalSource, which encapsulates an
interpreter and takes a package, args, and config map, and proceeds to run
the interpreter in a distinct goroutine. It synchronizes as needed to
poke and prod the interpreter along its path to create new resource objects.
There are two other sources, however. First, a nullSource, which simply
refuses to create new objects. This can be handy when writing isolated
tests but is also used to simulate the "empty" environment as necessary to
do a complete teardown of the target environment. Second, a fixedSource,
which takes a pre-computed array of objects, and hands those, in order, to
the planning engine; this is mostly useful as a testing technique.
Boatloads of code is now changed and updated in the various CLI commands.
This further chugs along towards pulumi/lumi#90. The end is in sight.
2017-06-10 20:50:47 +02:00
|
|
|
// Analyze analyzes a single resource object, and returns any errors that it finds.
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
Analyze(ctx context.Context, in *AnalyzeRequest, opts ...grpc.CallOption) (*AnalyzeResponse, error)
|
2017-12-01 22:50:32 +01:00
|
|
|
// GetPluginInfo returns generic information about this plugin, like its version.
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
GetPluginInfo(ctx context.Context, in *empty.Empty, opts ...grpc.CallOption) (*PluginInfo, error)
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
type analyzerClient struct {
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
cc *grpc.ClientConn
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
func NewAnalyzerClient(cc *grpc.ClientConn) AnalyzerClient {
|
|
|
|
return &analyzerClient{cc}
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
func (c *analyzerClient) Analyze(ctx context.Context, in *AnalyzeRequest, opts ...grpc.CallOption) (*AnalyzeResponse, error) {
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
out := new(AnalyzeResponse)
|
2018-06-30 01:14:49 +02:00
|
|
|
err := grpc.Invoke(ctx, "/pulumirpc.Analyzer/Analyze", in, out, c.cc, opts...)
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
|
|
|
return nil, err
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return out, nil
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
func (c *analyzerClient) GetPluginInfo(ctx context.Context, in *empty.Empty, opts ...grpc.CallOption) (*PluginInfo, error) {
|
2017-12-01 22:50:32 +01:00
|
|
|
out := new(PluginInfo)
|
2018-06-30 01:14:49 +02:00
|
|
|
err := grpc.Invoke(ctx, "/pulumirpc.Analyzer/GetPluginInfo", in, out, c.cc, opts...)
|
2017-12-01 22:50:32 +01:00
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
|
|
|
return nil, err
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return out, nil
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-30 01:14:49 +02:00
|
|
|
// Server API for Analyzer service
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
type AnalyzerServer interface {
|
Make more progress on the new deployment model
This change restructures a lot more pertaining to deployments, snapshots,
environments, and the like.
The most notable change is that the notion of a deploy.Source is introduced,
which splits the responsibility between the deploy.Plan -- which simply
understands how to compute and carry out deployment plans -- and the idea
of something that can produce new objects on-demand during deployment.
The primary such implementation is evalSource, which encapsulates an
interpreter and takes a package, args, and config map, and proceeds to run
the interpreter in a distinct goroutine. It synchronizes as needed to
poke and prod the interpreter along its path to create new resource objects.
There are two other sources, however. First, a nullSource, which simply
refuses to create new objects. This can be handy when writing isolated
tests but is also used to simulate the "empty" environment as necessary to
do a complete teardown of the target environment. Second, a fixedSource,
which takes a pre-computed array of objects, and hands those, in order, to
the planning engine; this is mostly useful as a testing technique.
Boatloads of code is now changed and updated in the various CLI commands.
This further chugs along towards pulumi/lumi#90. The end is in sight.
2017-06-10 20:50:47 +02:00
|
|
|
// Analyze analyzes a single resource object, and returns any errors that it finds.
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
Analyze(context.Context, *AnalyzeRequest) (*AnalyzeResponse, error)
|
2017-12-01 22:50:32 +01:00
|
|
|
// GetPluginInfo returns generic information about this plugin, like its version.
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
GetPluginInfo(context.Context, *empty.Empty) (*PluginInfo, error)
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
func RegisterAnalyzerServer(s *grpc.Server, srv AnalyzerServer) {
|
|
|
|
s.RegisterService(&_Analyzer_serviceDesc, srv)
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
func _Analyzer_Analyze_Handler(srv interface{}, ctx context.Context, dec func(interface{}) error, interceptor grpc.UnaryServerInterceptor) (interface{}, error) {
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
in := new(AnalyzeRequest)
|
|
|
|
if err := dec(in); err != nil {
|
|
|
|
return nil, err
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if interceptor == nil {
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
return srv.(AnalyzerServer).Analyze(ctx, in)
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
info := &grpc.UnaryServerInfo{
|
|
|
|
Server: srv,
|
2017-09-22 04:18:21 +02:00
|
|
|
FullMethod: "/pulumirpc.Analyzer/Analyze",
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
handler := func(ctx context.Context, req interface{}) (interface{}, error) {
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
return srv.(AnalyzerServer).Analyze(ctx, req.(*AnalyzeRequest))
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return interceptor(ctx, in, info, handler)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-12-01 22:50:32 +01:00
|
|
|
func _Analyzer_GetPluginInfo_Handler(srv interface{}, ctx context.Context, dec func(interface{}) error, interceptor grpc.UnaryServerInterceptor) (interface{}, error) {
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
in := new(empty.Empty)
|
2017-12-01 22:50:32 +01:00
|
|
|
if err := dec(in); err != nil {
|
|
|
|
return nil, err
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if interceptor == nil {
|
|
|
|
return srv.(AnalyzerServer).GetPluginInfo(ctx, in)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
info := &grpc.UnaryServerInfo{
|
|
|
|
Server: srv,
|
|
|
|
FullMethod: "/pulumirpc.Analyzer/GetPluginInfo",
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
handler := func(ctx context.Context, req interface{}) (interface{}, error) {
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
return srv.(AnalyzerServer).GetPluginInfo(ctx, req.(*empty.Empty))
|
2017-12-01 22:50:32 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return interceptor(ctx, in, info, handler)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
var _Analyzer_serviceDesc = grpc.ServiceDesc{
|
2017-09-22 04:18:21 +02:00
|
|
|
ServiceName: "pulumirpc.Analyzer",
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
HandlerType: (*AnalyzerServer)(nil),
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
Methods: []grpc.MethodDesc{
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
MethodName: "Analyze",
|
2017-03-11 19:07:34 +01:00
|
|
|
Handler: _Analyzer_Analyze_Handler,
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
},
|
2017-12-01 22:50:32 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
MethodName: "GetPluginInfo",
|
|
|
|
Handler: _Analyzer_GetPluginInfo_Handler,
|
|
|
|
},
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
Streams: []grpc.StreamDesc{},
|
|
|
|
Metadata: "analyzer.proto",
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
func init() { proto.RegisterFile("analyzer.proto", fileDescriptor_analyzer_4d94ca02b59f2385) }
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2018-07-12 03:07:50 +02:00
|
|
|
var fileDescriptor_analyzer_4d94ca02b59f2385 = []byte{
|
Implement first-class providers. (#1695)
### First-Class Providers
These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class
providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the
Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply
instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured
differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the
outputs of other resources.
### Provider Plugin Changes
In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider
configuration and configure providers without complete configuration
information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin
interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration
and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and
`DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag
accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`.
These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC
interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then,
these methods are implemented by adapters:
- `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string
or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins
only accept string-typed configuration values.
- `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration
values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is
unknown. The justification for this behavior is given
[here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106)
- `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and
configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any
config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and
the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of
which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is
only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we
can manage with the existing gRPC interface.
### Resource Model Changes
Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's
dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created,
may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other
resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which
are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design
addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not
yet been physically created and therefore have no ID.
All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a
single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be
used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's
provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its
URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider
should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically
sorting the dependency graph.
Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the
invocation via a provider reference.
### Engine Changes
First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine:
- The engine must have some way to map from provider references to
provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's
checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during
the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider
resources.
- In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi
programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine
must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package
referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for
a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data.
The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is
responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In
addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability
to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves
as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the
"provider provider").
The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to
plan setup and the eval source.
During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources
that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of
packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been
computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and
prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that
requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default
provider for its package.
While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration,
resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped
before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider
for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source
synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and
records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected
into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a
default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is
used and no new registration occurs.
### SDK Changes
These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK.
- A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used
to instantiate first-class providers.
- A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply
a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD
operations.
- A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that
control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type
includes a `provider` field that is analogous to
`ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 02:50:29 +02:00
|
|
|
// 285 bytes of a gzipped FileDescriptorProto
|
|
|
|
0x1f, 0x8b, 0x08, 0x00, 0x00, 0x09, 0x6e, 0x88, 0x02, 0xff, 0x6c, 0x91, 0x4f, 0x4b, 0xc3, 0x40,
|
|
|
|
0x10, 0xc5, 0x1b, 0x95, 0x9a, 0x8c, 0x5a, 0x61, 0xc0, 0x5a, 0x57, 0x0f, 0x25, 0x27, 0x4f, 0x5b,
|
|
|
|
0xa8, 0x88, 0x57, 0x15, 0xff, 0xde, 0x24, 0x9e, 0x3d, 0xa4, 0x65, 0x12, 0x02, 0x69, 0x76, 0xdd,
|
|
|
|
0x3f, 0x87, 0xf8, 0x29, 0xfc, 0xc8, 0xc6, 0xdd, 0x35, 0x16, 0xed, 0x6d, 0x86, 0xf7, 0xf8, 0xcd,
|
|
|
|
0x9b, 0x19, 0x18, 0xe5, 0x4d, 0x5e, 0xb7, 0x1f, 0xa4, 0xb8, 0x54, 0xc2, 0x08, 0x4c, 0xa4, 0xad,
|
|
|
|
0xed, 0xaa, 0x52, 0x72, 0xc9, 0xf6, 0x65, 0x6d, 0xcb, 0xaa, 0xf1, 0x02, 0x3b, 0x2d, 0x85, 0x28,
|
|
|
|
0x6b, 0x9a, 0xb9, 0x6e, 0x61, 0x8b, 0x19, 0xad, 0xa4, 0x69, 0x83, 0x78, 0xf6, 0x57, 0xd4, 0x46,
|
|
|
|
0xd9, 0xa5, 0xf1, 0x6a, 0xfa, 0x06, 0xa3, 0x1b, 0x3f, 0x25, 0xa3, 0x77, 0x4b, 0xda, 0x20, 0xc2,
|
|
|
|
0x8e, 0x69, 0x25, 0x4d, 0xa2, 0x69, 0x74, 0x9e, 0x64, 0xae, 0xc6, 0x2b, 0x80, 0xce, 0x2e, 0x49,
|
|
|
|
0x99, 0x8a, 0xf4, 0x64, 0xab, 0x53, 0xf6, 0xe6, 0xc7, 0xdc, 0x83, 0xf9, 0x0f, 0x98, 0xbf, 0x3a,
|
|
|
|
0x70, 0xb6, 0x66, 0x4d, 0x9f, 0xe0, 0xb0, 0xc7, 0x6b, 0x29, 0x1a, 0x4d, 0x78, 0x09, 0x71, 0x91,
|
|
|
|
0x57, 0xb5, 0x55, 0x1d, 0x29, 0x9a, 0x6e, 0x77, 0xa4, 0x13, 0xde, 0x2f, 0xc6, 0x83, 0xfb, 0xc1,
|
|
|
|
0x3b, 0xb2, 0xde, 0x9a, 0xde, 0xf5, 0x41, 0x83, 0x86, 0x0c, 0xe2, 0x30, 0xa9, 0x0d, 0x61, 0xfb,
|
|
|
|
0x1e, 0xc7, 0x30, 0x54, 0x94, 0x6b, 0xd1, 0xb8, 0xb0, 0x49, 0x16, 0xba, 0xf9, 0x67, 0x04, 0x71,
|
|
|
|
0xc0, 0x28, 0xbc, 0x85, 0xdd, 0x50, 0xe3, 0x86, 0x08, 0xe1, 0x1e, 0x8c, 0x6d, 0x92, 0xfc, 0x2e,
|
|
|
|
0xe9, 0x00, 0xaf, 0xe1, 0xe0, 0x91, 0xcc, 0x8b, 0xfb, 0xc6, 0x73, 0x53, 0x08, 0x1c, 0xff, 0x3b,
|
|
|
|
0xcb, 0xfd, 0xf7, 0x33, 0xd8, 0xd1, 0x1a, 0xe6, 0xd7, 0x9e, 0x0e, 0x16, 0x43, 0x67, 0xbc, 0xf8,
|
|
|
|
0x0a, 0x00, 0x00, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0x6d, 0x9c, 0x46, 0xee, 0x01, 0x00, 0x00,
|
Add basic analyzer support
This change introduces the basic requirements for analyzers, as per
pulumi/coconut#119. In particular, an analyzer can implement either,
or both, of the RPC methods, Analyze and AnalyzeResource. The former
is meant to check an overall deployment (e.g., to ensure it has been
signed off on) and the latter is to check individual resources (e.g.,
to ensure properties of them are correct, such as checking style,
security, etc. rules). These run simultaneous to overall checking.
Analyzers are loaded as plugins just like providers are. The difference
is mainly in their naming ("analyzer-" prefix, rather than "resource-"),
and the RPC methods that they support.
This isn't 100% functional since we need a way to specify at the CLI
that a particular analyzer should be run, in addition to a way of
recording which analyzers certain projects should use in their manifests.
2017-03-11 08:49:17 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|