This change implements `mu apply`, by driving compilation, evaluation,
planning, and then walking the plan and evaluating it. This is the bulk
of marapongo/mu#21, except that there's a ton of testing/hardening to
perform, in addition to things like progress reporting.
This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to,
and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins.
In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached
state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be
a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and
between whom. This context also controls per-resource context
allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured
cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests.
Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of
two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of
"mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with
any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard
library installation location, which need not be on the path for this
to work (since we know precisely where to look).
If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process.
The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their
own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to
pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line
to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT
that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it
pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc).
Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create
a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven
by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC
calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near
future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error"
mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is,
errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint,
which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
This change adds a flag to `plan` so that we can create deletion plans:
$ mu plan --delete
This will have an equivalent in the `apply` command, achieving the ability
to delete entire sets of resources altogether (see marapongo/mu#58).
This change introduces object monikers. These are unique, serializable
names that refer to resources created during the execution of a MuIL
program. They are pretty darned ugly at the moment, but at least they
serve their desired purpose. I suspect we will eventually want to use
more information (like edge "labels" (variable names and what not)),
but this should suffice for the time being. The names right now are
particularly sensitive to simple refactorings.
This is enough for marapongo/mu#69 during the current sprint, although
I will keep the work item (in a later sprint) to think more about how
to make these more stable. I'd prefer to do that with a bit of
experience under our belts first.
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.
This change more accurately implements ECMAScript prototype chains.
This includes using the prototype chain to lookup properties when
necessary, and copying them down upon writes.
This still isn't 100% faithful -- for example, classes and
constructor functions should be represented as real objects with
the prototype link -- so that examples like those found here will
work: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/constructor.
I've updated marapongo/mu#70 with additional details about this.
I'm sure we'll be forced to fix this as we encounter more "dynamic"
JavaScript. (In fact, it would be interesting to start running the
pre-ES6 output of TypeScript through the compiler as test cases.)
See http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/6.0/#sec-objects
for additional details on the prototype chaining semantics.
This adds scaffolding but no real functionality yet, as part of
marapongo/mu#41. I am landing this now because I need to take a
not-so-brief detour to gut and overhaul the core of the existing
compiler (parsing, semantic analysis, binding, code-gen, etc),
including merging the new pkg/pack contents back into the primary
top-level namespaces (like pkg/ast and pkg/encoding).
After that, I can begin driving the compiler to achieve the
desired effects of mu compile, first and foremost, and then plan
and apply later on.
