111–120 of 136 posts
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.
Anybody should be, as is sensible in any case, mirroring in a local registry as minimum. Probably it's even better to investing capabilities to be able to build all the images you rely on for being able to apply security patches etc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
For their own managed providers they no longer provide binaries in GitHub releases, and serve them from their own servers instead. Which feels like a trap BTW.
But, in their defense, installing an "unofficial" provider (or build!) into TF is some JFC so there's that. We'll just add that onto the damn near infinite pile of "I hope OpenTF fixes ..." things
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most businesses are not directly competing with the businesses making software they depend on
Some of them, however, may want to be acquired by companies that compete with HashiCorp.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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.
The publishing process for the public registry is very prescriptive, and there is indeed a manifest file involved - https://developer.hashicorp.com/terraform/registry/providers...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The publishing process for the public registry is very prescriptive, and there is indeed a manifest file involved - https://developer.hashicorp.com/terraform/registry/providers...
That helps, but it reads like the manifest is optional.
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.…
Getting a lot of docker hub vibes from this one. HashiCorp is course within their rights. Can't be cheap to run the registry given the obscene size of some terraform providers. $ ls -lah terraform/providers/registry.terraform.io/hashicorp/aws/5.14.0/darwin_amd64/ total 368M Anyone have an idea of the reasons terraform needs a 370 MiB binary just to call REST APIs?
That's because Terraform fell for the Go trap. When space and bandwidth are cheap, why not go for an environment that only ships fully self contained binaries? Oh, and why not go for a language that attracts hipsters like fruits attract flies, but is a nightmare to develop in?
Bloody ridiculous, it's a miracle Terraform got as far as it did.
(Yes, I'm working with Terraform every day and it's pretty decent but I'd love to extend it for Atlassian Cloud stuff without having to add a sixth language to my already sized toolbelt. Why Atlassian doesn't offer Terraform integration on their own is beyond me in any case)
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.…