The configuration of projects / stack names are ra...
# general
The configuration of projects / stack names are rather frustrating
Projects seem to be a way of grouping stacks, which is fine
However, as stack names need to be unique, you end up being rather verbose
Example: Project:
Stack can't be
, due to the unique constraints, so it ends up
It just feels really clunky
And the required
is annoying too
Copy code
Type                                 Name                                                  Status      Info
 -   pulumi:pulumi:Stack                  rawkodes-modern-life-rawkodes-modern-life-production  deleted
My OCD isn't coping 😂
The more I'm playing with this, it seems to be a wrapper around Terraform's workspaces?
Ah, now I see the GCP definitions are generated from Terraform's provider. Is this how most of Pulumi works?
The project/stack structure is unrelated to Terraform Workspaces (though I suppose most solutions to providing separate environments and deployments of a single project have some fundamental similarities :-)). You are right that because the identity of a stack is
, the stack name generally has to be a little more verbose to remain unique within an organization. We used to have identity tracked as
, which allowed the stack name to be something more like
, as it was scoped to a project. It sounds like this would align closer with how you wanted to think about things. We're continuing to look at refactoring things in this direction again - but for now you can generally map into this mental model just be making all stacknames look like
(which appears to be what you are doing). The fact that that
row duplicates this information is just a bug - see
I see the GCP definitions are generated from Terraform's provider. Is this how most of Pulumi works?
The AWS, Azure and GCP resource providers build on top of the
for these platforms, but use the
CLI and engine for driving deployments.
Thanks for the info
makes a lot more sense to me 🙂
I also had similar concerns, trying to grasp how stacks should be used and how to give them shorter names. Stack local to project would make sense to me. I don't have large infra though, so my only use case for multiple stacks were deployments on different cloud accounts.
I also expected
, and and spent 10 mins creating and destroying stacks until I stopped being confused.
@quiet-wolf-18467 @tall-librarian-49374 @cool-helicopter-70130 I had the exact same observation about stack / project names a couple of days ago ( Now just just created a github issue out of it. Please add your vote to the gh issue 🙂
👍 2