At the moment, we permit resources to carry a name, which the
engine uses as part of URN creation. Unfortunately, the property
"name" has a very high chance of conflicting with meaningful
user-authored properties. And furthermore this sort of name,
although key to creating URNs which are core to how the overall
system performs deployments and manages resources, are seldom
used programmatically in Lumi programs. As a result, it's a real
nuisance that we stole the good name.
This change renames that property from "name" to "urnName". This
not only has a lower likelihood of conflicting, but it also looks
reasonable sitting alongside the "urn" property. In fact, in some
future universe, after some of the upcoming runtime changes, we
may not even need the name property on the objects whatsoever.
I had originally toyed with the idea of eliminating the Resource
versus NamedResource distinction. This is certainly simpler and
remains a possibility. I didn't do that right now, however, because
the flexibility of letting resource providers name resources however
they see fit still seems possibly useful. For example, we keep
talking about whether functions can be auto-named based on hashes.
Until we've run those conversations to ground, I'd hate to do some
work that just needs to be undone in order to enable a scenario that
has a non-trivial likelihood of us wanting to explore.
Report an error when Lumi runtime compilation fails.
Also adds a reusable install_release.sh script to use
for installing Lumi package releases, plus expansion
of symlinks in package Makefiles.
This change copies the NPM package files to the installation directory
so that the result is a valid NPM package. This is a temporary workaround
until (😨) the day that we actually publish/consume real NPM packages...
This reverts commit c3db70849d.
I've opted to take a new strategy to ensure the bridge properties
don't conflict (with manual renames), similar to the name property.
This renames the basemost resource properties, id and urn, to
names that are less likely to conflict with properties that real
resources will want to use, pid and upn (provider ID and Universal
Pulumi Name, respectively).
I actually ran into this with the current bridge work. An alternative
solution would be to require derived resources to pick different names,
however this is unfortunate because usually they are more "user-facing"
than ours. Another alternative is to not hijack the object properties
at all, but that too is problematic because we use these properties
during the evaluation of plans and deployments.
This seems like a reasonable middle ground.
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 splits the core Lumi library -- which is meant to be a pure
LumiJS library without any special status -- from the runtime library --
which is really meant to be the underpinnings of "special" functionality
that integrates with the runtime in sophisticated ways.
After this change, LumiRT is at the very bottom, and, despite it using
a subset of LumiJS, it must not trigger any functionality that would
mandate the use of the LumiJS runtime library. Atop that, the LumiJS
library is layered. And finally, above that, Lumi depends on LumiJS.
LumiJS lambdas can now be serialized when they include calls to other LumiJS lambdas. The chain of lambda dependencies is jointly serialized into the target Lambda.
Also, LumiJS lambdas now include `node_modules` automatically in the AWS Lambda, ensuring the the runtime execution environment more closely matches the deployment time environment.
An early version of the gh-cicd example supporting #134 is added which uses these capabilities, currently including a mocked GitHub resource provider.
This changes the resource model to persist input and output properties
distinctly, so that when we diff changes, we only do so on the programmer-
specified input properties. This eliminates problems when the outputs
differ slightly; e.g., when the provider normalizes inputs, adds its own
values, or fails to produce new values that match the inputs.
This change simultaneously makes progress on pulumi/lumi#90, by beginning
tracking the resource objects implicated in a computed property's value.
I believe this fixes both #189 and #198.
This reverts commit 048c35d428.
I have a pending change that fixes this along with a number of
other issues (including pulumi/lumi#198 and pulumi/lumi#187),
however, it's going to take a little longer and I want to unblock.
This fixespulumi/lumi#200.
The @lumi.out decorator ended up not being required after all.
The engine essentially treats all resource properties as potentially
output properties now, given the way we read back the state from
the provider after essential operations.
This is a good thing, because the evaluator currently doesn't
perform dynamic decoration in a way that would be amenable to
a faithful ECMAScript implementation (see pulumi/lumi#128).
This change adds a @lumi.out decorator and modifies LumIDL to emit it on
output properties of resource types. There still isn't any runtime
awareness, however, this is an isolated change that will facilitate it.
This new package is similar to the AWS Serverless Application Model, offering
higher-level interfaces to manage serverless resources. This will be a candidate
for moving into its own package in the future.
The FunctionX class has been moved into this module, and a new API class has
been added
The API class manages a collection of an API Gateway RestAPI, Stage and Deployment,
based on a collection of routes linked to Functions. On changes to the API specification,
it updates the RestAPI, replaces the Deployment and updates the Stage to point to
the updated Deployment.
This change also reorganizes some of the intrinsics.
Resolves#137.
This is an initial pass for supporting JavaScript lambda syntax for defining an AWS Lambda Function.
A higher level API for defining AWS Lambda Function objects `aws.lambda.FunctionX` is added which accepts a Lumi lambda as an argument, and uses that lambda to generate the AWS Lambda Function code package.
LumiJS lambdas are serialized as the JavaScript text of the lambda body, along with a serialized version of the environment that is deserialized at runtime and used as the context for the body of the lambda.
Remaining work to further improve support for lambdas is being tracked in #173, #174, #175, and #177.
Unifies the notion of BuiltinFunctions with the existing Intrinsic.
Intrinsic is now only a wrapper type, used to indicate the need to lookup the symbol in the
eval pacakges table of registered intrinsics. It does not carry the invoker function used
to eval the intrinsic.
This is triggering the need for all downstream consumers of the Lumi
library to enable experimental decorators support. Given that it's not
even clear where we'll land on this (pending pulumi/lumi#137), and in
fact are actively revisiting the relationship between functions and
assets, I'm removing this annotation.
This change keeps the lumi prefix on our CLI tools.
As @lukehoban pointed out in person, as soon as we do pulumi/coconut#98,
most people (other than compiler authors themselves) won't actually be
typing the commands. And, furthermore, the commands aren't all that bad.
Eventually I assume we'll want something like `lumi-js`, or
`lumi-js-compiler`, so that binaries are discovered dynamically in a way
that is extensible for future languages. We can tackle this during #98.
