3 ms·
> It's like Terraform with the user-friendliness of Heroku. > It's very hard because every providers have different APIs and concepts so you have to start from
by tlrobinson 6y ago
> It's like Terraform with the user-friendliness of Heroku.
> It's very hard because every providers have different APIs and concepts so you have to start from scratch for each.
Why not build it as a layer on top of Terraform?
- threentaway 6y agoThis was my first thought. Terraform modules can accomplish all of this.
- jeremylevy 6y agoI do use Terraform. Terraform is very good to create the building blocks of your architecture but not so much for the user-friendliness part. Let's take an example: You have an architecture with a CI/CD. Great. You add your CodePipeline and CodeBuild ressources to your plan. Perfect. For the CI part, you want your build to start on every commit on every non-master branch. Bad news: CodePipeline doesn't have support for multi-branch. So you will need to find a way to clone the default pipeline for each new branch. Repeat this for all the user-friendly features (GitHub check runs, env vars management, deployment monitoring/rollback...) for the three cloud providers for all the different architectures and you start to feel the difficulty (I can testify ;)).
- tlrobinson 6y agoI’m suggesting your tool could generate Terraform code and run the Terraform command “under the hood” so you don’t have to reimplement everything Terraform already does. Users wouldn’t need to know about Terraform (unless they wanted to. It might be nice to have a way to export the Terraform code)
- jeremylevy 6y agoSorry! My answer was certainly not very clear. I use Terraform “under the hood” for this project. What I was trying to explain is that the "hard part" is not the creation of the architecture components but the user-friendly features.