141–150 of 191 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't expect Oracle to have a license complication with itself...
it's mostly just hypocritical. If everyone acted like Oracle; there would be no mysql users. Which is the point being made.
Oracle making the change due to licensing is like a dictionary definition of hubris, considering how their own license enforcement operates.
It's great to see more companies adopting OpenTofu, and especially larger ones! As a side note, we've recently released OpenTofu 1.7 with end-to-end state encryption, enhanced provider-defined functions, and a bunch more[0]. If you've been holding out with the migration, now is the perfect moment to take another look, and join the many companies that have already migrated! [0]: https://github.com/opentofu/opentofu/re…
I'm really excited to see the end-to-end state encryption. I've always thought it was bizarre that Hashicorp didn't prioritize this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We use typescript + pulumi for this. It's pretty amazing. And Pulumi uses Terraform modules under the hood so you get the full power of Terraform with the goodness of Typescript. Even self hosting your state management in a bucket is simpler with Pulumi since it uses lock files on S3 versus a separate DyanamoDB + S3 combo. I have been using it in production for 4-5 years and used Terraform for several years before th…
> since it uses lock files on S3 versus a separate DyanamoDB + S3 combo This is disturbing because S3 does not give you guarantees required to implement real locking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny that you mention MariaDB. Oracle bought MySQL which was forked into MariaDB. MariaDB created the Business Source License (BSL). Hashicorp switches Terraform to BSL which then leads to Terraform being forked into OpenTofu. OpenTofu seems to be getting adopted by Oracle.
Full circle of corporate facepalm
Earlier quoted context omitted.
if moving to terraform fails for your org, you have much deeper issues that likely aren’t related to terraform
> if moving to terraform fails for your org, you have much deeper issues that likely aren’t related to terraform That is nonsense. You just said, equivalently, "Terraform is all things to all people".
I'll pose a question to your snotty response - What specifically about terraform would lead to it failing to be implemented at a company? The answer to that will provide all you need.
Oracle making the change due to licensing is like a dictionary definition of hubris, considering how their own license enforcement operates.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if moving to terraform fails for your org, you have much deeper issues that likely aren’t related to terraform That is nonsense. You just said, equivalently, "Terraform is all things to all people".
No I didn't. Failing to adopt an IAC approach, which I have seen in my career many times, whether it's terraform or any of the other tools - comes down to organizational issues. I'll pose a question to your snotty response - What specifically about terraform would lead to it failing to be implemented at a company? The answer to that will provide all you need.
Rather, Terraform does not add value within every organizational structure. Not adding value is failing. Having a negative ROI is failing.
None of these infrastructure tools are perfect, and the ways in which they are imperfect mean that some are better or worse matches for an organization's needs.
Therefore your initial statement is oversimplified, presumptuous, and ultimately nonsensical. A logical reframing is "if your organization does not match Terraform's strengths, then your org is the problem", and that is clearly not true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's mostly just hypocritical. If everyone acted like Oracle; there would be no mysql users. Which is the point being made.
I don't understand your comment. Oracle is hypocritical because like every company they take everything they can and give the minimum they have to? which part is hypocritical?
Let's see;
If I giving away a product because I think it's for the betterment of mankind, and definitely not an attempt to rug-pull or anything like that: no, just for developer good will.
Then I am offered a free service, and I do not use it for fear that there could potentially be some rugpulling, despite having a reputation for that myself: and the project I'm considering having no reputation for that.
Then the pretense in which I "give away" my software, is morally dubious. I would never permit myself to be in the same situation as I need others to be in order for my product to be successful.
MySQL/Virtualbox/Java etc;
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No I didn't. Failing to adopt an IAC approach, which I have seen in my career many times, whether it's terraform or any of the other tools - comes down to organizational issues. I'll pose a question to your snotty response - What specifically about terraform would lead to it failing to be implemented at a company? The answer to that will provide all you need.
I'm not being snotty. Terraform is not the best choice for every organization. Rather, Terraform does not add value within every organizational structure. Not adding value is failing. Having a negative ROI is failing. None of these infrastructure tools are perfect, and the ways in which they are imperfect mean that some are better or worse matches for an organization's needs. Therefore your initial statement is overs…