81–90 of 136 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of curiosity, why isn't OpenTF's development, done, well, in the open? What's the rationale for keeping it closed for now? I'm not critiquing, not a Terraform user so don't have any stake in this discussion, just curious.
Mostly trademark issues, really.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO it shouldn't be much different than "sure, it's open source now, but what if it stops being maintained?" Because open-source code never stops being open-source, it just stops getting open-source updates. Closed-source in some situations can prevent you from using existing software; you also have other closed-source issues like bugs being unfixable. Would you rather use a service that worst-case, you have to patch…
> Would you rather use a service that worst-case, you have to patch and maintain yourselves? Having to patch and maintain a complex piece of open source code yourself for most smaller non tech companies for all practical purposes means that it might as well be abandoned closed source code.
I've seen a lot about OpenTF and I applaud the (very large) effort to get a viable alternative in place in short order. Is anyone aware of corresponding projects for other tools in the HashiCorp suite?
This is such a terrible move for the ecosystem as a whole. So now it means individuals using tools like Layerform and Terragrunt cannot use the registry anymore even though the software hasn’t changed at all? How will they even enforce that?
The leadership at Hashicorp doesn't seem to "get" open source development, or at least doesn't seem to value the community of their customers. The change of license could have been attributed to them trying to protect their SaaS business if you squinted. But now they're saying "this is ours and you can't play", even though that hurts tf in the long run due to alienation of the community. I get that they need to gener…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But, I guess if OpenTF is taking a position of "Use us instead of Terraform", then they shouldn't expect to get the usage of Hashicorps infra. It’s totally something they can do, but it seems short-sighted. They had to know that this wouldn’t actually stop the momentum around OpenTF, but just result in HashiCorp giving up the control they have over the canonical namespace. As precedent, Docker allows Kubernetes and…
> As precedent, Docker allows Kubernetes and Podman to access its registry, for example. Don’t give them any ideas. Nothing would stop them, though it is probably hard to actually enforce on a public repo.
They do have a search interface, if one wanted to look for their favorite: https://gallery.ecr.aws/
Not the OP, but I suspect HN has trimmed the anchor link. > https://github.com/opentffoundation/roadmap/issues/24#issuec... That's the comment that made the issue clear -- specifically TOS were amended for https://registry.terraform.io to state: > You may download providers, modules, policy libraries and/or other Services or Content from this website __solely for use with, or in support of, HashiCorp Terraform.__ ie.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mostly trademark issues, really.
As in, you need to make sure you strip out all references to the Terraform trademark before you make it public?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the providers might actually come from GitHub because the registry insists you have them as release assets
That indeed seems to be the case. Seems that for community providers, HashiCorp is serving up JSON which refers to GitHub download links. Here’s a sample size of 1: https://registry.terraform.io/v1/providers/spacelift-io/spac... According to the provider registry protocol, which I have previously implemented for internal hosting (in an afternoon of writing a single file of Python): https://developer.hashicorp.com/ter…
Even though this will likely prevent OpenTF from connecting to registry.terraform.io to get plugins, the source code for most (all?) plugins is still open source and actually stored on GitHub (e.g. https://github.com/terraform-provider-openstack/terraform-pr... ). More work for OpenTF to get up and running, but also feels reasonable that HashiCorp wouldn't allow connecting to their service.
>still open source and actually stored on GitHub I think that's true, but it's probably hard to recreate large parts of the index. I don't think there's any mandatory manifest or something like that where you can reliably identify a repo as something that appears in their registry. Probably some missing metadata too.