https://pulumi.com logo
Join Slack
Powered by
This message was deleted.
# general
s
This message was deleted.
w
There should be very few changes between 
0.18.x
and 
1.0-beta
versions, so it is very much not expected that moving to these versions would propose significant changes. Can you share details on what versions you migrated from and to and what unexpected diffs you saw? Either here or in a GitHub issue?
q
yea one sec
Copy code
@pulumi/aws 0.18.1 -> 1.0.0-beta.2
@pulumi/awsx 0.18.0 -> 0.18.8
@pulumi/cloud 0.18.0 -> 0.18.1
@pulumi/gcp 0.18.5 -> 1.0.0-beta.1
@pulumi/pulumi 0.17.1 -> 1.0.0-beta.4
whoops one sec
here’s the preview output
(names redacted)
My concern, other than it just not working, is that it’s trying to create resources that already exist, and then wants to delete them?
w
Yes - this does look concerning. Would you mind opening an issue so we can have someone look into it further? Note that I believe the issue here is going to be related to this upgrade 
@pulumi/awsx 0.18.0 -> 0.18.8
not the beta upgrades themselves. That's updating though 6 months of changes to that library - from a very early version of that library before it was initially launched. Still - we would not expect this level of churn and it will be useful to understand what the root issue is here.
m
@quick-action-34599 what happens if you revert the update to 
@pulumi/awsx
but leave the others intact?
And were there any code changes you needed to make when updating?
q
@microscopic-florist-22719 going to try that now
no, no syntax errors. I upgraded so I could use the 
import
property on CustomResourceOptions
👍 1
A full removal of node_modules and revert to prior versions has the same behavior
m
Prior versions of all packages, or just 
@pulumi/awsx
?
q
all packages
Going to try just that one
No joy, same result
m
Hm. It's really surprising that rolling back doesn't solve the issue. Let's take this to DM
q
thanks
Open in Slack
PreviousNext
Powered by