Live data from Hacker News

The future of Terraform CDK

github.com

131–140 of 140 posts

Re: The future of Terraform CDK

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any particular libraries you use to generate TF-JSON from jsonnet? I wrote a generator a little while ago that can create jsonnet libraries from the TF schemas: https://github.com/Duologic/soysonnet Example lib here: https://github.com/Duologic/soysonnet-aws I only needed it for AWS so I didn't spend more time on it.

By hand :( But I like your project. Do you use Tanka?

I work at Grafana and did quite a bit of work on Tanka in the past, so yes.

Re: The future of Terraform CDK

#132

Damn, what are the best alternatives here? For pure AWS I guess CDK directly is okay, but locks you in.

> but locks you in

Not picking on you personally but having had this conversation many times over many years with many clients I find it confounding. Oftentimes TF itself was heavily promoted as a way of "avoiding lock in".

Well guess what? Now you're locked-in to IBM, whose motivations may not be perfectly aligned to you goals of simply and efficiently using your cloud provider of choice to deliver your business outcomes.

What we refer to as lock-in is simply an expression of risk, with one axis being the cost of getting off $solution and the other being the likelihood of needing to do so. Having stepped through this exercise a few times, the cost of rewriting your e.g. AWS API Gateway + Lambda + SQS + RDS + CloudWatch etc architecture invariably vastly dwarfed the cost of changing the IaC language it is expressed in.

Anytime you feel the urge to overbuild on a cloud provider's services, stop, and do a really rigorous cost/benefit analysis. If you truly have unique drivers the data should tell the story.

Re: The future of Terraform CDK

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you don't get the annoying array form for the resulting resource with the `enabled` syntax, right? EDIT: Oh just realized the sibling asked the same, but the doc doesn't state that clearly, although it seems to me that the doc implies that yeah, it doesn't use the array form anymore.

Yes indeed! It does not use the annoying array form.

Worth switching to Opentofu only for this, then! I fuckin hate the count pattern for conditional present/not present that leads to an array of size == 1.

Re: The future of Terraform CDK

#136
post #31

It would be great to have an alternative to Terraform that uses a bit more advanced provider (at last for AWS). Does OpenTofu use that same provider?

It does. What are you looking for in a more advanced AWS provider?

Have you ever debugged what goes on with lets say the aws provider during a tf apply?

Re: The future of Terraform CDK

#137

Damn, what are the best alternatives here? For pure AWS I guess CDK directly is okay, but locks you in.

Normal Terraform, Pulumi or OpenTofu

As a complete noob to the space, as an individual, who doesn't care about being "hireable" or whatever, which one has the highest ROI? OpenTofu?

Re: The future of Terraform CDK

#140
There are active discussions in the https://cdk.dev/ Slack channel #terraform-cdk about building community-driven forks of the existing Hashicorp/IBM CDKTF repositories. A number of developers who work at organizations that are heavily reliant on CDKTF have offered to pitch in.

There is currently a live proof of concept fork of the main cdktf repository that one developer made: https://github.com/TerraConstructs/terraform-cdk

And one Open Tofu developer said he and some other Open Tofu developers would be happy to collaborate with that community-driven effort to keep CDKTF alive: "The OpenTofu maintainers are happy to collaborate with that project once it's up and running, but we will not be directly involved." https://github.com/opentofu/opentofu/issues/3585

Post reply on HN