No matter how you like to participate in developer communities, Pulumi wants to meet you there. If you want to meet other Pulumi users to share use-cases and best practices, contribute code or documentation, see us at an event, or just tell a story about something cool you did with Pulumi, you are part of our community.

Pulumi Community

Hello, I am sorry to report that the “invoke” fix in 1.5.3 is regressing the use of `provider`  in the `ConfigFile`.   It seems to use the ambient kube provider.

I bet that this example would demonstrate the issue:
<https://github.com/pulumi/kubernetes-guides/blob/91f57c393fd9e5c14c74c7d087e3b08a8d919bae/gcp/03-cluster-configuration/index.ts>

If one were to add a `ConfigFile` to the mix.

Hi Eron, I responded on the issue. I wasn’t able to reproduce this behavior. Can you open an issue with more details on your setup?

Can you post your example?  then I can compare.

One complication in my program is, I use a `pulumi.ComponentResource` to wrap the `ConfigFile`.  i.e. `provider` is set on the `ComponentResource` , and the `ConfigFile` simply uses `parent`.   Could that be it?

<https://gist.github.com/lblackstone/ba195626add2551f98ea6bfd346550fc>

Yeah, could be specific to ComponentResource

To make your example fit, the guestbook would be wrapped in a ComponentResouce.

Testing this now:
```export class TestComponentResource extends pulumi.ComponentResource {
    constructor(name: string,
                opts: pulumi.ComponentResourceOptions = {}) {
        super("test:kubernetes-ts:TestComponentResource", name, {}, opts);

        new k8s.yaml.ConfigFile("guestbook",
            {file: "guestbook.yaml"}, {parent: this}
        );
    }
}

new TestComponentResource("test", {provider: gkeCluster.provider});```

OK, thanks very much for investigating, I’ll try to make a repro based on your script.  One error I noticed in mine is that I didn’t have the `parent` set on the provider; I had `dependsOn`.