2 ms·

I actually prefer the RUM model. The previous "per apply" based model penalized early stage companies when your infrastructure is rapidly evolving, and discour

I actually prefer the RUM model. The previous "per apply" based model penalized early stage companies when your infrastructure is rapidly evolving, and discouraged splitting state into smaller workspaces/making smaller iterative changes. Charging by RUM more closely aligns the pricing to the scale/complexity of the infrastructure being managed which makes more sense to me. That said it has tempted me to move management of more resources into kubernetes (via cross plane/config connector)

danw1979 2y ago
The previous model I was referring to was a flat-rate TF Cloud team plan at (in the UK) <$30/month. There were runtime limits IIRC but there was nothing stopping Hashicorp offering a “per user” fixed rate plan at several hundred dollars per month to enterprises for the same service. The various clients I’ve worked for who used TF would have lapped this up. RUM (or the equally opaque “call us” - we won’t answer! - enterprise pricing that proceeded it) not so much.