Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improvement over plan, apply and destroy functionality #708

Open
jon-shanks opened this issue Apr 28, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Improvement over plan, apply and destroy functionality #708

jon-shanks opened this issue Apr 28, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@jon-shanks
Copy link
Member

jon-shanks commented Apr 28, 2023

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Yes, currently the terranetes configuration of the service has an abstracted relationship over several phases:

  • plan
  • apply
  • destroy

These are mapped to by integrations on the overall configuration object at a kubernetes level i.e.
delete the resource = destroy
create the resource = plan and apply
This would work well if terranetes had a tight relationship with the API of the cloud resource it is managing, like an operator would - and all changes i am making to drive the outcome for my cloud resources was through the configuration itself. however, this isn't the case. This means that i am iterating on things outside of terranetes and therefore i will need to reapply things that didn't involve changes to my configuration inside of terranetes itself but outside of it.

Describe the solution you'd like
I'd like a nicer way to rationalise with the stages that terranetes is doing in its integration layer i.e. if i want to rerun a plan, i want to be able to do this - this is because something may have changed at the terranetes configuration of the controller level and not even at my consumption level. Also, sometimes things can just not work i.e. like anything maybe the job failed due to connectivity etc. So i want to be able to rerun the plan and apply (a bit like CI) for whatever reason.

Describe alternatives you've considered
N/A

Additional context
Terranetes is more like a CI system as opposed to a tight cloud relationship on cloud modules i.e. an operator that is managing a specific cloud API resource and therefore the logic is outside of terranetes on the provisioning, there has to be a way to be able to manage that lifecycle reality inside of terranetes better.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant