2017-06-23 23:53:41 +02:00
|
|
|
// Copyright 2016-2017, Pulumi Corporation
|
|
|
|
//
|
|
|
|
// Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
|
|
|
|
// you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
|
|
|
|
// You may obtain a copy of the License at
|
2017-05-18 23:51:52 +02:00
|
|
|
//
|
|
|
|
// http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
|
|
|
|
//
|
|
|
|
// Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
|
|
|
|
// distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
|
|
|
|
// WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
|
|
|
|
// See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
|
|
|
|
// limitations under the License.
|
2017-02-13 23:26:46 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2017-04-12 19:38:12 +02:00
|
|
|
package main
|
2017-02-13 23:26:46 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
import (
|
2017-03-01 18:57:14 +01:00
|
|
|
"bufio"
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
"fmt"
|
|
|
|
"io/ioutil"
|
|
|
|
"os"
|
2017-02-13 23:26:46 +01:00
|
|
|
"path/filepath"
|
|
|
|
|
2017-04-19 23:46:50 +02:00
|
|
|
goerr "github.com/pkg/errors"
|
2017-02-13 23:26:46 +01:00
|
|
|
"github.com/spf13/cobra"
|
|
|
|
|
2017-05-18 20:38:28 +02:00
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/compiler/core"
|
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/compiler/errors"
|
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/diag/colors"
|
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/encoding"
|
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
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/resource/deploy"
|
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/resource/environment"
|
2017-05-18 20:38:28 +02:00
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/tokens"
|
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/util/cmdutil"
|
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/util/contract"
|
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/util/mapper"
|
|
|
|
"github.com/pulumi/lumi/pkg/workspace"
|
2017-02-13 23:26:46 +01:00
|
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
func newEnvCmd() *cobra.Command {
|
2017-06-16 18:46:09 +02:00
|
|
|
var showIDs bool
|
|
|
|
var showURNs bool
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
cmd := &cobra.Command{
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
Use: "env",
|
2017-03-10 22:17:55 +01:00
|
|
|
Short: "Manage target environments",
|
|
|
|
Long: "Manage target environments\n" +
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
"\n" +
|
2017-03-10 22:17:55 +01:00
|
|
|
"An environment is a named deployment target, and a single project may have many of them.\n" +
|
|
|
|
"Each environment has a configuration and deployment history associated with it, stored in\n" +
|
|
|
|
"the workspace, in addition to a full checkpoint of the last known good deployment.\n",
|
2017-06-16 18:46:09 +02:00
|
|
|
Run: cmdutil.RunFunc(func(cmd *cobra.Command, args []string) error {
|
|
|
|
curr := getCurrentEnv()
|
|
|
|
if curr == "" {
|
|
|
|
return goerr.New("no current environment; either `lumi env init` or `lumi env select` one")
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("Current environment is %v\n", curr)
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf(" (use `lumi env select` to change environments; `lumi env ls` lists known ones)\n")
|
|
|
|
target, snapshot, checkpoint := readEnv(curr)
|
|
|
|
if checkpoint == nil {
|
|
|
|
return goerr.Errorf("could not read environment information")
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if checkpoint.Latest != nil {
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("Last deployment at %v\n", checkpoint.Latest.Time)
|
|
|
|
if checkpoint.Latest.Info != nil {
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("Additional deployment info: %v\n", checkpoint.Latest.Info)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if target.Config != nil && len(target.Config) > 0 {
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("%v configuration variables set (see `lumi config` for details)\n", len(target.Config))
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if len(snapshot.Resources) == 0 {
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("No resources currently in this environment\n")
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("%v resources currently in this environment:\n", len(snapshot.Resources))
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("\n")
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("%-48s %s\n", "TYPE", "NAME")
|
|
|
|
for _, res := range snapshot.Resources {
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("%-48s %s\n", res.Type(), res.URN().Name())
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// If the ID and/or URN is requested, show it on the following line. It would be nice to do this
|
|
|
|
// on a single line, but they can get quite lengthy and so this formatting makes more sense.
|
|
|
|
if showIDs {
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("\tID: %s\n", res.ID())
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if showURNs {
|
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("\tURN: %s\n", res.URN())
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return nil
|
|
|
|
}),
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-06-16 18:46:09 +02:00
|
|
|
cmd.PersistentFlags().BoolVarP(
|
|
|
|
&showIDs, "show-ids", "i", false, "Display each resource's provider-assigned unique ID")
|
|
|
|
cmd.PersistentFlags().BoolVarP(
|
|
|
|
&showURNs, "show-urns", "u", false, "Display each resource's Lumi-assigned globally unique URN")
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
cmd.AddCommand(newEnvInitCmd())
|
|
|
|
cmd.AddCommand(newEnvLsCmd())
|
|
|
|
cmd.AddCommand(newEnvRmCmd())
|
Make major commands more pleasant
This change eliminates the need to constantly type in the environment
name when performing major commands like configuration, planning, and
deployment. It's probably due to my age, however, I keep fat-fingering
simple commands in front of investors and I am embarrassed!
In the new model, there is a notion of a "current environment", and
I have modeled it kinda sorta just like Git's notion of "current branch."
By default, the current environment is set when you `init` something.
Otherwise, there is the `coco env select <env>` command to change it.
(Running this command w/out a new <env> will show you the current one.)
The major commands `config`, `plan`, `deploy`, and `destroy` will prefer
to use the current environment, unless it is overridden by using the
--env flag. All of the `coco env <cmd> <env>` commands still require the
explicit passing of an environment which seems reasonable since they are,
after all, about manipulating environments.
As part of this, I've overhauled the aging workspace settings cruft,
which had fallen into disrepair since the initial prototype.
2017-03-22 03:23:32 +01:00
|
|
|
cmd.AddCommand(newEnvSelectCmd())
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return cmd
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-07 14:47:42 +01:00
|
|
|
func initEnvCmd(cmd *cobra.Command, args []string) (*envCmdInfo, error) {
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
// Read in the name of the environment to use.
|
Make major commands more pleasant
This change eliminates the need to constantly type in the environment
name when performing major commands like configuration, planning, and
deployment. It's probably due to my age, however, I keep fat-fingering
simple commands in front of investors and I am embarrassed!
In the new model, there is a notion of a "current environment", and
I have modeled it kinda sorta just like Git's notion of "current branch."
By default, the current environment is set when you `init` something.
Otherwise, there is the `coco env select <env>` command to change it.
(Running this command w/out a new <env> will show you the current one.)
The major commands `config`, `plan`, `deploy`, and `destroy` will prefer
to use the current environment, unless it is overridden by using the
--env flag. All of the `coco env <cmd> <env>` commands still require the
explicit passing of an environment which seems reasonable since they are,
after all, about manipulating environments.
As part of this, I've overhauled the aging workspace settings cruft,
which had fallen into disrepair since the initial prototype.
2017-03-22 03:23:32 +01:00
|
|
|
if len(args) == 0 || args[0] == "" {
|
2017-04-19 23:46:50 +02:00
|
|
|
return nil, goerr.Errorf("missing required environment name")
|
2017-02-27 23:13:27 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
2017-03-09 16:52:50 +01:00
|
|
|
return initEnvCmdName(tokens.QName(args[0]), args[1:])
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-02-27 23:13:27 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2017-03-09 16:52:50 +01:00
|
|
|
func initEnvCmdName(name tokens.QName, args []string) (*envCmdInfo, error) {
|
Make major commands more pleasant
This change eliminates the need to constantly type in the environment
name when performing major commands like configuration, planning, and
deployment. It's probably due to my age, however, I keep fat-fingering
simple commands in front of investors and I am embarrassed!
In the new model, there is a notion of a "current environment", and
I have modeled it kinda sorta just like Git's notion of "current branch."
By default, the current environment is set when you `init` something.
Otherwise, there is the `coco env select <env>` command to change it.
(Running this command w/out a new <env> will show you the current one.)
The major commands `config`, `plan`, `deploy`, and `destroy` will prefer
to use the current environment, unless it is overridden by using the
--env flag. All of the `coco env <cmd> <env>` commands still require the
explicit passing of an environment which seems reasonable since they are,
after all, about manipulating environments.
As part of this, I've overhauled the aging workspace settings cruft,
which had fallen into disrepair since the initial prototype.
2017-03-22 03:23:32 +01:00
|
|
|
// If the name is blank, use the default.
|
|
|
|
if name == "" {
|
|
|
|
name = getCurrentEnv()
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if name == "" {
|
2017-04-19 23:46:50 +02:00
|
|
|
return nil, goerr.Errorf("missing environment name (and no default found)")
|
Make major commands more pleasant
This change eliminates the need to constantly type in the environment
name when performing major commands like configuration, planning, and
deployment. It's probably due to my age, however, I keep fat-fingering
simple commands in front of investors and I am embarrassed!
In the new model, there is a notion of a "current environment", and
I have modeled it kinda sorta just like Git's notion of "current branch."
By default, the current environment is set when you `init` something.
Otherwise, there is the `coco env select <env>` command to change it.
(Running this command w/out a new <env> will show you the current one.)
The major commands `config`, `plan`, `deploy`, and `destroy` will prefer
to use the current environment, unless it is overridden by using the
--env flag. All of the `coco env <cmd> <env>` commands still require the
explicit passing of an environment which seems reasonable since they are,
after all, about manipulating environments.
As part of this, I've overhauled the aging workspace settings cruft,
which had fallen into disrepair since the initial prototype.
2017-03-22 03:23:32 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-27 23:13:27 +01:00
|
|
|
// Read in the deployment information, bailing if an IO error occurs.
|
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
|
|
|
target, snapshot, checkpoint := readEnv(name)
|
|
|
|
if checkpoint == nil {
|
|
|
|
return nil, goerr.Errorf("could not read environment information")
|
2017-02-27 23:13:27 +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
|
|
|
contract.Assert(target != nil)
|
|
|
|
contract.Assert(checkpoint != nil)
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
return &envCmdInfo{
|
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
|
|
|
Target: target,
|
|
|
|
Checkpoint: checkpoint,
|
|
|
|
Snapshot: snapshot,
|
|
|
|
Args: args,
|
2017-03-07 14:47:42 +01:00
|
|
|
}, nil
|
2017-02-27 23:13:27 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
type envCmdInfo struct {
|
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
|
|
|
Target *deploy.Target // the target environment.
|
|
|
|
Checkpoint *environment.Checkpoint // the full serialized checkpoint from which this came.
|
|
|
|
Snapshot *deploy.Snapshot // the environment's latest deployment snapshot
|
|
|
|
Args []string // the args after extracting the environment name
|
2017-03-07 14:47:42 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-23 15:36:27 +01:00
|
|
|
func confirmPrompt(msg string, name tokens.QName) bool {
|
|
|
|
prompt := fmt.Sprintf(msg, name)
|
2017-06-07 19:52:03 +02:00
|
|
|
fmt.Print(
|
2017-03-01 18:57:14 +01:00
|
|
|
colors.ColorizeText(fmt.Sprintf("%v%v%v\n", colors.SpecAttention, prompt, colors.Reset)))
|
2017-03-23 15:36:27 +01:00
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("Please confirm that this is what you'd like to do by typing (\"%v\"): ", name)
|
2017-03-01 18:57:14 +01:00
|
|
|
reader := bufio.NewReader(os.Stdin)
|
2017-03-23 15:36:27 +01:00
|
|
|
if line, _ := reader.ReadString('\n'); line != string(name)+"\n" {
|
2017-03-01 18:57:14 +01:00
|
|
|
fmt.Fprintf(os.Stderr, "Confirmation declined -- exiting without doing anything\n")
|
|
|
|
return false
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return true
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
Make major commands more pleasant
This change eliminates the need to constantly type in the environment
name when performing major commands like configuration, planning, and
deployment. It's probably due to my age, however, I keep fat-fingering
simple commands in front of investors and I am embarrassed!
In the new model, there is a notion of a "current environment", and
I have modeled it kinda sorta just like Git's notion of "current branch."
By default, the current environment is set when you `init` something.
Otherwise, there is the `coco env select <env>` command to change it.
(Running this command w/out a new <env> will show you the current one.)
The major commands `config`, `plan`, `deploy`, and `destroy` will prefer
to use the current environment, unless it is overridden by using the
--env flag. All of the `coco env <cmd> <env>` commands still require the
explicit passing of an environment which seems reasonable since they are,
after all, about manipulating environments.
As part of this, I've overhauled the aging workspace settings cruft,
which had fallen into disrepair since the initial prototype.
2017-03-22 03:23:32 +01:00
|
|
|
// createEnv just creates a new empty environment without deploying anything into it.
|
|
|
|
func createEnv(name tokens.QName) {
|
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
|
|
|
env := &deploy.Target{Name: name}
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
if success := saveEnv(env, nil, "", false); success {
|
2017-05-19 00:54:40 +02:00
|
|
|
fmt.Printf("Environment '%v' initialized; see `lumi deploy` to deploy into it\n", name)
|
Make major commands more pleasant
This change eliminates the need to constantly type in the environment
name when performing major commands like configuration, planning, and
deployment. It's probably due to my age, however, I keep fat-fingering
simple commands in front of investors and I am embarrassed!
In the new model, there is a notion of a "current environment", and
I have modeled it kinda sorta just like Git's notion of "current branch."
By default, the current environment is set when you `init` something.
Otherwise, there is the `coco env select <env>` command to change it.
(Running this command w/out a new <env> will show you the current one.)
The major commands `config`, `plan`, `deploy`, and `destroy` will prefer
to use the current environment, unless it is overridden by using the
--env flag. All of the `coco env <cmd> <env>` commands still require the
explicit passing of an environment which seems reasonable since they are,
after all, about manipulating environments.
As part of this, I've overhauled the aging workspace settings cruft,
which had fallen into disrepair since the initial prototype.
2017-03-22 03:23:32 +01:00
|
|
|
setCurrentEnv(name, false)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// newWorkspace creates a new workspace using the current working directory.
|
|
|
|
func newWorkspace() (workspace.W, error) {
|
|
|
|
pwd, err := os.Getwd()
|
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
|
|
|
return nil, err
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
ctx := core.NewContext(pwd, nil, &core.Options{})
|
|
|
|
return workspace.New(ctx)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// getCurrentEnv reads the current environment.
|
|
|
|
func getCurrentEnv() tokens.QName {
|
|
|
|
var name tokens.QName
|
|
|
|
w, err := newWorkspace()
|
|
|
|
if err == nil {
|
|
|
|
name = w.Settings().Env
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if err != 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorIO, err)
|
Make major commands more pleasant
This change eliminates the need to constantly type in the environment
name when performing major commands like configuration, planning, and
deployment. It's probably due to my age, however, I keep fat-fingering
simple commands in front of investors and I am embarrassed!
In the new model, there is a notion of a "current environment", and
I have modeled it kinda sorta just like Git's notion of "current branch."
By default, the current environment is set when you `init` something.
Otherwise, there is the `coco env select <env>` command to change it.
(Running this command w/out a new <env> will show you the current one.)
The major commands `config`, `plan`, `deploy`, and `destroy` will prefer
to use the current environment, unless it is overridden by using the
--env flag. All of the `coco env <cmd> <env>` commands still require the
explicit passing of an environment which seems reasonable since they are,
after all, about manipulating environments.
As part of this, I've overhauled the aging workspace settings cruft,
which had fallen into disrepair since the initial prototype.
2017-03-22 03:23:32 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return name
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// setCurrentEnv changes the current environment to the given environment name, issuing an error if it doesn't exist.
|
|
|
|
func setCurrentEnv(name tokens.QName, verify bool) {
|
|
|
|
if verify {
|
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
|
|
|
if _, _, checkpoint := readEnv(name); checkpoint == nil {
|
Make major commands more pleasant
This change eliminates the need to constantly type in the environment
name when performing major commands like configuration, planning, and
deployment. It's probably due to my age, however, I keep fat-fingering
simple commands in front of investors and I am embarrassed!
In the new model, there is a notion of a "current environment", and
I have modeled it kinda sorta just like Git's notion of "current branch."
By default, the current environment is set when you `init` something.
Otherwise, there is the `coco env select <env>` command to change it.
(Running this command w/out a new <env> will show you the current one.)
The major commands `config`, `plan`, `deploy`, and `destroy` will prefer
to use the current environment, unless it is overridden by using the
--env flag. All of the `coco env <cmd> <env>` commands still require the
explicit passing of an environment which seems reasonable since they are,
after all, about manipulating environments.
As part of this, I've overhauled the aging workspace settings cruft,
which had fallen into disrepair since the initial prototype.
2017-03-22 03:23:32 +01:00
|
|
|
return // no environment by this name exists, bail out.
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Switch the current workspace to that environment.
|
|
|
|
w, err := newWorkspace()
|
|
|
|
if err == nil {
|
|
|
|
w.Settings().Env = name
|
|
|
|
err = w.Save()
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if err != 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorIO, err)
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +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
|
|
|
// removeTarget permanently deletes the environment's information from the local workstation.
|
|
|
|
func removeTarget(env *deploy.Target) {
|
|
|
|
deleteTarget(env)
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
msg := fmt.Sprintf("%sEnvironment '%s' has been removed!%s\n",
|
|
|
|
colors.SpecAttention, env.Name, colors.Reset)
|
2017-06-07 19:52:03 +02:00
|
|
|
fmt.Print(colors.ColorizeText(msg))
|
2017-03-01 18:57:14 +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
|
|
|
// backupTarget makes a backup of an existing file, in preparation for writing a new one. Instead of a copy, it
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
// simply renames the file, which is simpler, more efficient, etc.
|
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 backupTarget(file string) {
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
contract.Require(file != "", "file")
|
Tidy up more lint
This change fixes a few things:
* Most importantly, we need to place a leading "." in the paths
to Gometalinter, otherwise some sub-linters just silently skip
the directory altogether. errcheck is one such linter, which
is a very important one!
* Use an explicit Gometalinter.json file to configure the various
settings. This flips on a few additional linters that aren't
on by default (line line length checking). Sadly, a few that
I'd like to enable take waaaay too much time, so in the future
we may consider a nightly job (this includes code similarity,
unused parameters, unused functions, and others that generally
require global analysis).
* Now that we're running more, however, linting takes a while!
The core Lumi project now takes 26 seconds to lint on my laptop.
That's not terrible, but it's long enough that we don't want to
do the silly "run them twice" thing our Makefiles were previously
doing. Instead, we shall deploy some $$($${PIPESTATUS[1]}-1))-fu
to rely on the fact that grep returns 1 on "zero lines".
* Finally, fix the many issues that this turned up.
I think(?) we are done, except, of course, for needing to drive
down some of the cyclomatic complexity issues (which I'm possibly
going to punt on; see pulumi/lumi#259 for more details).
2017-06-22 21:09:46 +02:00
|
|
|
err := os.Rename(file, file+".bak")
|
|
|
|
contract.IgnoreError(err) // ignore errors.
|
2017-06-06 15:05:35 +02:00
|
|
|
// IDEA: consider multiple backups (.bak.bak.bak...etc).
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +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
|
|
|
// deleteTarget removes an existing snapshot file, leaving behind a backup.
|
|
|
|
func deleteTarget(env *deploy.Target) {
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
contract.Require(env != nil, "env")
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
// Just make a backup of the file and don't write out anything new.
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
file := workspace.EnvPath(env.Name)
|
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
|
|
|
backupTarget(file)
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
// readEnv reads in an existing snapshot file, issuing an error and returning nil if something goes awry.
|
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 readEnv(name tokens.QName) (*deploy.Target, *deploy.Snapshot, *environment.Checkpoint) {
|
2017-03-01 00:43:46 +01:00
|
|
|
contract.Require(name != "", "name")
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
file := workspace.EnvPath(name)
|
Add basic targeting capability
This change partially implements pulumi/coconut#94, by adding the
ability to name targets during creation and reuse those names during
deletion and update. This simplifies the management of deployment
records, checkpoints, and snapshots.
I've opted to call these things "husks" (perhaps going overboard with
joy after our recent renaming). The basic idea is that for any
executable Nut that will be deployed, you have a nutpack/ directory
whose layout looks roughly as follows:
nutpack/
bin/
Nutpack.json
... any other compiled artifacts ...
husks/
... one snapshot per husk ...
For example, if we had a stage and prod husk, we would have:
nutpack/
bin/...
husks/
prod.json
stage.json
In the prod.json and stage.json files, we'd have the most recent
deployment record for that environment. These would presumably get
checked in and versioned along with the overall Nut, so that we
can use Git history for rollbacks, etc.
The create, update, and delete commands look in the right place for
these files automatically, so you don't need to manually supply them.
2017-02-25 18:24:52 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-25 01:44:46 +01:00
|
|
|
// Detect the encoding of the file so we can do our initial unmarshaling.
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
m, ext := encoding.Detect(file)
|
|
|
|
if m == 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorIllegalMarkupExtension, ext)
|
2017-03-01 00:43:46 +01:00
|
|
|
return nil, nil, nil
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-26 20:52:44 +01:00
|
|
|
// Now read the whole file into a byte blob.
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
b, err := ioutil.ReadFile(file)
|
|
|
|
if err != nil {
|
2017-02-26 20:52:44 +01:00
|
|
|
if os.IsNotExist(err) {
|
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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorInvalidEnvName, name)
|
2017-02-26 20:52:44 +01:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorIO, err)
|
2017-02-26 20:52:44 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
2017-03-01 00:43:46 +01:00
|
|
|
return nil, nil, nil
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +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
|
|
|
// Unmarshal the contents into a checkpoint structure.
|
|
|
|
var checkpoint environment.Checkpoint
|
|
|
|
if err = m.Unmarshal(b, &checkpoint); err != nil {
|
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorCantReadDeployment, file, err)
|
2017-03-01 00:43:46 +01:00
|
|
|
return nil, nil, nil
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
2017-02-25 01:44:46 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Next, use the mapping infrastructure to validate the contents.
|
2017-06-06 15:05:35 +02:00
|
|
|
// IDEA: we can eliminate this redundant unmarshaling once Go supports strict unmarshaling.
|
Implement mapper.Encode "for real"
This change implements `mapper.Encode` "for real" (that is, in a way
that isn't a complete embarrassment). It uses the obvious reflection
trickery to encode a tagged struct and its values as a JSON-like
in-memory map and collection of keyed values.
During this, I took the opportunity to also clean up a few other things
that had been bugging me. Namely, the presence of `mapper.Object` was
always error prone, since it isn't a true "typedef" in the sence that
it carries extra RTTI. Instead of doing that, let's just use the real
`map[string]interface{}` "JSON-map-like" object type. Even better, we
no longer require resource providers to deal with the mapper
infrastructure. Instead, the `Check` function can simply return an
array of errors. It's still best practice to return field-specific errors
to facilitate better diagnostics, but it's no longer required; and I've
added `resource.NewFieldError` to eliminate the need to import mapper.
As of this change, we can also consistently emit RPC structs with `lumi`
tags, rather than `lumi` tags on the way in and `json` on the way out.
This completes pulumi/lumi#183.
2017-06-06 02:43:52 +02:00
|
|
|
var obj map[string]interface{}
|
2017-02-25 01:44:46 +01:00
|
|
|
if err = m.Unmarshal(b, &obj); err != 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorCantReadDeployment, file, err)
|
2017-03-01 00:43:46 +01:00
|
|
|
return nil, nil, nil
|
2017-04-08 16:44:02 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if obj["latest"] != nil {
|
|
|
|
if latest, islatest := obj["latest"].(map[string]interface{}); islatest {
|
|
|
|
delete(latest, "resources") // remove the resources, since they require custom marshaling.
|
2017-02-25 01:44:46 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-04-08 16:44:02 +02:00
|
|
|
md := mapper.New(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
|
|
|
var ignore environment.Checkpoint // just for errors.
|
2017-04-08 16:44:02 +02:00
|
|
|
if err = md.Decode(obj, &ignore); err != 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorCantReadDeployment, file, err)
|
2017-04-08 16:44:02 +02:00
|
|
|
return nil, nil, nil
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-02-25 01:44:46 +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
|
|
|
target, snapshot := environment.DeserializeCheckpoint(&checkpoint)
|
|
|
|
contract.Assert(target != nil)
|
|
|
|
return target, snapshot, &checkpoint
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
// saveEnv saves a new snapshot at the given location, backing up any existing ones.
|
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 saveEnv(env *deploy.Target, snap *deploy.Snapshot, file string, existok bool) bool {
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
contract.Require(env != nil, "env")
|
Add basic targeting capability
This change partially implements pulumi/coconut#94, by adding the
ability to name targets during creation and reuse those names during
deletion and update. This simplifies the management of deployment
records, checkpoints, and snapshots.
I've opted to call these things "husks" (perhaps going overboard with
joy after our recent renaming). The basic idea is that for any
executable Nut that will be deployed, you have a nutpack/ directory
whose layout looks roughly as follows:
nutpack/
bin/
Nutpack.json
... any other compiled artifacts ...
husks/
... one snapshot per husk ...
For example, if we had a stage and prod husk, we would have:
nutpack/
bin/...
husks/
prod.json
stage.json
In the prod.json and stage.json files, we'd have the most recent
deployment record for that environment. These would presumably get
checked in and versioned along with the overall Nut, so that we
can use Git history for rollbacks, etc.
The create, update, and delete commands look in the right place for
these files automatically, so you don't need to manually supply them.
2017-02-25 18:24:52 +01:00
|
|
|
if file == "" {
|
2017-03-06 15:32:39 +01:00
|
|
|
file = workspace.EnvPath(env.Name)
|
Add basic targeting capability
This change partially implements pulumi/coconut#94, by adding the
ability to name targets during creation and reuse those names during
deletion and update. This simplifies the management of deployment
records, checkpoints, and snapshots.
I've opted to call these things "husks" (perhaps going overboard with
joy after our recent renaming). The basic idea is that for any
executable Nut that will be deployed, you have a nutpack/ directory
whose layout looks roughly as follows:
nutpack/
bin/
Nutpack.json
... any other compiled artifacts ...
husks/
... one snapshot per husk ...
For example, if we had a stage and prod husk, we would have:
nutpack/
bin/...
husks/
prod.json
stage.json
In the prod.json and stage.json files, we'd have the most recent
deployment record for that environment. These would presumably get
checked in and versioned along with the overall Nut, so that we
can use Git history for rollbacks, etc.
The create, update, and delete commands look in the right place for
these files automatically, so you don't need to manually supply them.
2017-02-25 18:24:52 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2017-05-18 20:38:28 +02:00
|
|
|
// Make a serializable LumiGL data structure and then use the encoder to encode it.
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
m, ext := encoding.Detect(file)
|
|
|
|
if m == 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorIllegalMarkupExtension, ext)
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
return false
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if filepath.Ext(file) == "" {
|
|
|
|
file = file + ext
|
|
|
|
}
|
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
|
|
|
dep := environment.SerializeCheckpoint(env, snap)
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
b, err := m.Marshal(dep)
|
|
|
|
if err != 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorIO, err)
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
return false
|
|
|
|
}
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
// If it's not ok for the file to already exist, ensure that it doesn't.
|
|
|
|
if !existok {
|
2017-06-21 22:24:35 +02:00
|
|
|
if _, staterr := os.Stat(file); staterr == 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorIO, goerr.Errorf("file '%v' already exists", file))
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
return false
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Back up the existing file if it already exists.
|
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
|
|
|
backupTarget(file)
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Ensure the directory exists.
|
2017-06-21 22:24:35 +02:00
|
|
|
if err = os.MkdirAll(filepath.Dir(file), 0700); err != 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorIO, err)
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
return false
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// And now write out the new snapshot file, overwriting that location.
|
2017-06-21 22:24:35 +02:00
|
|
|
if err = ioutil.WriteFile(file, b, 0600); err != 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
|
|
|
cmdutil.Diag().Errorf(errors.ErrorIO, err)
|
2017-02-26 20:20:14 +01:00
|
|
|
return false
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return true
|
Repivot plan/apply commands; prepare for updates
This change repivots the plan/apply commands slightly. This is largely
in preparation for performing deletes and updates of existing environments.
The old way was slightly confusing and made things appear more "magical"
than they actually are. Namely, different things are needed for different
kinds of deployment operations, and trying to present them each underneath
a single pair of CLI commands just leads to weird modality and options.
The new way is to offer three commands: create, update, and delete. Each
does what it says on the tin: create provisions a new environment, update
makes resource updates to an existing one, and delete tears down an existing
one entirely. The arguments are what make this interesting: create demands
a MuPackage to evaluate (producing the new desired state snapshot), update
takes *both* an existing snapshot file plus a MuPackage to evaluate (producing
the new desired state snapshot to diff against the existing one), and delete
merely takes an existing snapshot file and no MuPackage, since all it must
do is tear down an existing known environment.
Replacing the plan functionality is the --dry-run (-n) flag that may be
passed to any of the above commands. This will print out the plan without
actually performing any opterations.
All commands produce serializable resource files in the MuGL file format,
and attempt to do smart things with respect to backups, etc., to support the
intended "Git-oriented" workflow of the pure CLI dev experience.
2017-02-22 20:21:26 +01:00
|
|
|
}
|