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 is an initial implementation of the Coconut IDL Compiler (CIDLC).
This is described further in
https://github.com/pulumi/coconut/blob/master/docs/design/idl.md,
and the work is tracked by coconut/pulumi#133.
I've been kicking the tires with this locally enough to checkpoint the
current version. There are quite a few loose ends not yet implemented,
most of them minor, with the exception of the RPC stub generation which
I need to flesh out more before committing.
As part of pulumi/coconut#133, we will be doing an IDL dialect of Go
plus a compiler, to support writing resource providers more easily.
This commit includes a design note for how it works.
This change introduces the basic concept of assets. It is far from
fully featured, however, it is enough to start adding support for various
storage kinds that require access to I/O-backed data (files, etc).
The challenge is that Coconut is deterministic by design, and so you
cannot simply read a file in an ad-hoc manner and present the bytes to
a resource provider. Instead, we will model "assets" as first class
entities whose data source is described to the system in a more declarative
manner, so that the system and resource providers can manage them.
There are three ways to create an asset at the moment:
1. A constant, in-memory string.
2. A path to a file on the local filesystem.
3. A URI, whose scheme is extensible.
Eventually, we want to support byte blobs, but due to our use of a
"JSON-like" type system, this isn't easily expressible just yet.
The URI scheme is extensible in that file://, http://, and https://
are supported "out of the box", but individual providers are free to
recognize their own schemes and support them. For instance, copying
one S3 object to another will be supported simply by passing a URI
with the s3:// protocol in the usual way.
Many utility functions are yet to be written, but this is a start.
This changes a few naming things:
* Rename "husk" to "environment" (`coco env` for short).
* Rename NutPack/NutIL to CocoPack/CocoIL.
* Rename the primary Nut.yaml/json project file to Coconut.yaml/json.
* Rename the compiled Nutpack.yaml/json file to Cocopack.yaml/json.
* Rename the package asset directory from nutpack/ to .coconut/.
This change adds support for serializing snapshots in MuGL, per the
design document in docs/design/mugl.md. At the moment, it is only
exposed from the `mu plan` command, which allows you to specify an
output location using `mu plan --output=file.json` (or `-o=file.json`
for short). This serializes the snapshot with monikers, resources,
and so on. Deserialization is not yet supported; that comes next.
This stuff is still evolving -- and I've put it on pause to make progress
on graph generation -- but I had these edits in my enlistment and didn't
want to lose them.
This change removes some ambiguity that existed in MuIL tokens given the
simplistic naming scheme of only using "/" as a delimiter. We could have
resolved this ambiguity through successive name bindings, but I prefer a
more deterministic approach. A module member token now delimits the
package/module name from the member name by a ":" character, as in
"aws/ec2:VM". Furthermore, when reexporting elements from the current
package/module, we will use the self-referential "." character, as in
".:VM".
The stacks.md document used to describe the metadata format. Now that we've
moved away from the old model of YAML + Go templates, and created the MuPack/MuIL
format, this document needed to be overhauled.
It's pretty bare bones now, however it will eventually evolve into a document
describing how the Mu abstractions map down onto MuPack/MuIL concepts. For example,
it describes how subclassing mu.Stack creates a "stack", even though at the MuPack/MuIL
level it's just any old subclass.
Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I've tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.