Since I was digging around over the weekend after the change to move
away from light black, and the impact it had on less important
information showing more prominently than it used to, I took a step
back and did a deeper tidying up of things. Another side goal of this
exercise was to be a little more respectful of terminal width; when
we could say things with fewer words, I did so.
* Stylize the preview/update summary differently, so that it stands
out as a section. Also highlight the total changes with bold -- it
turns out this has a similar effect to the bright white colorization,
just without the negative effects on e.g. white terminals.
* Eliminate some verbosity in the phrasing of change summaries.
* Make all heading sections stylized consistently. This includes
the color (bright magenta) and the vertical spacing (always a newline
separating headings). We were previously inconsistent on this (e.g.,
outputs were under "---outputs---"). Now the headings are:
Previewing (etc), Diagnostics, Outputs, Resources, Duration, and Permalink.
* Fix an issue where we'd parent things to "global" until the stack
object later showed up. Now we'll simply mock up a stack resource.
* Don't show messages like "no change" or "unchanged". Prior to the
light black removal, these faded into the background of the terminal.
Now they just clutter up the display. Similar to the elision of "*"
for OpSames in a prior commit, just leave these out. Now anything
that's written is actually a meaningful status for the user to note.
* Don't show the "3 info messages," etc. summaries in the Info column
while an update is ongoing. Instead, just show the latest line. This
is more respectful of width -- I often find that the important
messages scroll off the right of my screen before this change.
For discussion:
- I actually wonder if we should eliminate the summary
altogether and always just show the latest line. Or even
blank it out. The summary feels better suited for the
Diagnostics section, and the Status concisely tells us
how a resource's update ended up (failed, succeeded, etc).
- Similarly, I question the idea of showing only the "worst"
message. I'd vote for always showing the latest, and again
leaving it to the Status column for concisely telling the
user about the final state a resource ended up in.
* Stop prepending "info: " to every stdout/stderr message. It adds
no value, clutters up the display, and worsens horizontal usage.
* Lessen the verbosity of update headline messages, so we now instead
of e.g. "Previewing update of stack 'x':", we just say
"Previewing update (x):".
* Eliminate vertical whitespace in the Diagnostics section. Every
independent console.out previously was separated by an entire newline,
which made the section look cluttered to my eyes. These are just
streams of logs, there's no reason for the extra newlines.
* Colorize the resource headers in the Diagnostic section light blue.
Note that this will change various test baselines, which I will
update next. I didn't want those in the same commit.
This change makes it a little easier to do the style of highlighting
we are doing now with the login prompt, cleaning up some of the
padding calculations that were otherwise complicated due to ANSI
escape sequences.
This change makes our login prompt a little "friendlier", especially
important since this will be the first thing a new user sees.
The new message is:
$ pulumi new
We need your Pulumi account to identify you.
Enter your access token from https://app.pulumi.com/account
or hit <ENTER> to log in using your browser :
This includes a few changes:
* The repo name -- and hence the Go modules -- changes from pulumi-fabric to pulumi.
* The Node.js SDK package changes from @pulumi/pulumi-fabric to just pulumi.
* The CLI is renamed from lumi to pulumi.
This changes a few things in the CLI, mostly just prettying it up:
* Label all steps more clearly with the kind of step. Also
unify the way we present this during planning and deployment.
* Summarize the changes that *did not* get made just as clearly
as those that did. In other words, stuff like this:
info: 2 resources changed:
+1 resource created
-1 resource deleted
5 resources unchanged
and
info: no resources required
5 resources unchanged
* Always print output properties when they are pertinent.
This includes creates, replacements, and updates.
* Show replacement creates and deletes very distinctly. The
create parts show up minty green and the delete parts show up
rosey red. These are the "physical" steps, compared to the
"logical" step of replacement (which remains marigold).
I still don't love where we are here. The asymmetry between
planning and deployment bugs me, and could be surprising.
("Hey, my deploy doesn't look like my plan!") I don't know
what developers will want to see here and I feel like in
general we are spewing far too much into the CLI to make it
even useful for anything but diagnosing failures afterwards.
I propose that we should do a deep dive on this during the
CLI epic, pulumi/pulumi-service#2.
This resolvespulumi/pulumi-fabric#305.
We are renaming Lumi to Pulumi Fabric. This change simply renames the
pulumi/lumi repo to pulumi/pulumi-fabric, without the CLI tools and other
changes that will follow soon afterwards.
This change introduces a --debug option to the plan, deploy, and
destroy commands. Unlike --logtostderr, which merely hooks into the
copious Glogging that we perform (and is therefore meant for developers
of the tools themselves and not end users), --debug hooks into the
user-facing debug stream. This now includes any debug messages coming
from the resource providers as they perform their tasks.
This change implements the `get` function for resources. Per pulumi/lumi#83,
this allows Lumi scripts to actually read from the target environment.
For example, we can now look up a SecurityGroup from its ARN:
let group = aws.ec2.SecurityGroup.get(
"arn:aws:ec2:us-west-2:153052954103:security-group:sg-02150d79");
The returned object is a fully functional resource object. So, we can then
link it up with an EC2 instance, for example, in the usual ways:
let instance = new aws.ec2.Instance(..., {
securityGroups: [ group ],
});
This didn't require any changes to the RPC or provider model, since we
already implement the Get function.
There are a few loose ends; two are short term:
1) URNs are not rehydrated.
2) Query is not yet implemented.
One is mid-term:
3) We probably want a URN-based lookup function. But we will likely
wait until we tackle pulumi/lumi#109 before adding this.
And one is long term (and subtle):
4) These amount to I/O and are not repeatable! A change in the target
environment may cause a script to generate a different plan
intermittently. Most likely we want to apply a different kind of
deployment "policy" for such scripts. These are inching towards the
scripting model of pulumi/lumi#121, which is an entirely different
beast than the repeatable immutable infrastructure deployments.
Finally, it is worth noting that with this, we have some of the fundamental
underpinnings required to finally tackle "inference" (pulumi/lumi#142).
This change fixes a couple issues that prevented restarting a
deployment after partial failure; this was due to the fact that
unchanged resources didn't propagate IDs from old to new. This
is remedied by making unchanged a map from new to old, and making
ID propagation the first thing plan application does.
This change does a few things:
* First and foremost, it tracks configuration variables that are
initialized, and optionally prints them out as part of the
prelude/header (based on --show-config), both in a dry-run (plan)
and in an actual deployment (apply).
* It tidies up some of the colorization and messages, and includes
nice banners like "Deploying changes:", etc.
* Fix an assertion.
* Issue a new error
"One or more errors occurred while applying X's configuration"
just to make it easier to distinguish configuration-specific
failures from ordinary ones.
* Change config keys to tokens.Token, not tokens.ModuleMember,
since it is legal for keys to represent class members (statics).
This change introduces a new informational message category to the
overall diagnostics infrastructure, and then wires up the resource
provider plugins stdout/stderr streams to it. In particular, a
write to stdout implies an informational message, whereas a write to
stderr implies an error. This is just a very simple and convenient
way for plugins to provide progress reporting; eventually we may
need something more complex, due to parallel evaluation of resource
graphs, however I hope we don't have to deviate too much from this.
Per Eric's suggestion, this moves the colors we use into a central
location so that it'll be easier someday down the road to reconfigure
and/or disable them, etc. This does not include a --no-colors option
although we should really include this soon before it gets too hairy.
This change introduces a new package, pkg/resource, that will form
the foundation for actually performing deployment plans and applications.
It contains the following key abstractions:
* resource.Provider is a wrapper around the CRUD operations exposed by
underlying resource plugins. It will eventually defer to resource.Plugin,
which itself defers -- over an RPC interface -- to the actual plugin, one
per package exposing resources. The provider will also understand how to
load, cache, and overall manage the lifetime of each plugin.
* resource.Resource is the actual resource object. This is created from
the overall evaluation object graph, but is simplified. It contains only
serializable properties, for example. Inter-resource references are
translated into serializable monikers as part of creating the resource.
* resource.Moniker is a serializable string that uniquely identifies
a resource in the Mu system. This is in contrast to resource IDs, which
are generated by resource providers and generally opaque to the Mu
system. See marapongo/mu#69 for more information about monikers and some
of their challenges (namely, designing a stable algorithm).
* resource.Snapshot is a "snapshot" taken from a graph of resources. This
is a transitive closure of state representing one possible configuration
of a given environment. This is what plans are created from. Eventually,
two snapshots will be diffable, in order to perform incremental updates.
One way of thinking about this is that a snapshot of the old world's state
is advanced, one step at a time, until it reaches a desired snapshot of
the new world's state.
* resource.Plan is a plan for carrying out desired CRUD operations on a target
environment. Each plan consists of zero-to-many Steps, each of which has
a CRUD operation type, a resource target, and a next step. This is an
enumerator because it is possible the plan will evolve -- and introduce new
steps -- as it is carried out (hence, the Next() method). At the moment, this
is linearized; eventually, we want to make this more "graph-like" so that we
can exploit available parallelism within the dependencies.
There are tons of TODOs remaining. However, the `mu plan` command is functioning
with these new changes -- including colorization FTW -- so I'm landing it now.
This is part of marapongo/mu#38 and marapongo/mu#41.