This PR just wires the `Package.Main` field to the Pulumi Service (and in subsequent PRs, the `pulumi-service` and `pulumi-ppc` repos).
@joeduffy , should we just upload the entire `package.Package` type with the `UpdateProgramRequest` type? I'm not sure we want to treat that type as part of part of our public API surface area. But on the other hand, we'll need to mirror relevant fields in N places if we don't.
This change fixes getProject to return the project name, as
originally intended. (One line was missing.)
It also adds an integration test for this.
Fixespulumi/pulumi#580.
Because the Pulumi.yaml file demarcates the boundary used when
uploading a program to the Pulumi.com service at the moment, we
have trouble when a Pulumi program uses "up and over" references.
For instance, our customer wants to build a Dockerfile located
in some relative path, such as `../../elsewhere/`.
To support this, we will allow the Pulumi.yaml file to live
somewhere other than the main Pulumi entrypoint. For example,
it can live at the root of the repo, while the Pulumi program
lives in, say, `infra/`:
Pulumi.yaml:
name: as-before
main: infra/
This fixespulumi/pulumi#575. Further work can be done here to
provide even more flexibility; see pulumi/pulumi#574.
PR #501 regressed this test due to a change in its error message. We
should consider updating the rest of the `stack` commands to use a
similar message (rather than the "file not found" they currently emit).
This PR adds integration tests for exercising `pulumi init` and the `pulumi stack *` commands. The only functional change is merging in https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/492 , which I found while writing the tests and (of course 😁 ) wrote a regression for.
To do this I introduce a new test driver called `PulumiProgram`. This is different from the one found in the `testing/integration`package in that it doesn't try to prescribe a workflow. It really just deals in executing commands, and confirming strings are in the output.
While it doesn't hurt to have more tests for `pulumi`, my motivation here was so that I could reuse these to ensure I keep the same behavior for my pending PR that implements Cloud-enabled variants of some of these commands.
