Does the `ConfigMap` type in ``` SetAllConfig sets all value

Question

Does the `ConfigMap` type in ``` SetAllConfig sets all values in the provided config map func s Stack SetAllConfig ctx context Context config ConfigMap error return s Workspace SetAllConfig ctx s Name config ``` support Pulumi structured configuration It doesn t look like it

red-match-15116 · Answer

It does not probably the way you expect it You can however pass in structured configuration as serialized json strings

limited-rainbow-51650 · Answer

I guess I m missing something about your suggestion Do you have a small code snippet to expand on your thinking

red-match-15116 · Answer

There are some rough edges for instance <https github com pulumi pulumi issues 6352> But it is possible to work with structured configuration as long as you handle the de serialization in your code Would welcome contributions to make this better if you feel inspired but it s not in our list of immediately prioritized items

red-match-15116 · Answer

gt I guess I m missing something about your suggestion Do you have a small code snippet to expand on your thinking I think the issue I linked might be helpful to understand what goes on but essentially to set a map you would have to set the top level config key ```s Workspace SetConfig ctx s Name myTopLevelKey ConfigValue Value inner foo another bar Secret false ``` To get that config you would have to get the top level config ```s Workspace GetConfig ctx s Name myTopLevelKey ``` And then Unmarshal the resulting json string into a struct and then access the inner keys

red-match-15116 · Answer

As I said definitely not an ideal flow but it is possible to work around the current limitations using the pattern I described

limited-rainbow-51650 · Answer

Context is this <https github com ringods pulumi resource> This is a Pulumi integration with Concourse CI To run Pulumi from Concourse I have to create a binary accepting JSON from concourse on stdin and Unmarshal that to a Go type I hoped that I could use `ConfigMap` at the right depth of my struct type so unmarshalling would be based on the `ConfigMap` type But I guess I will have to intercept with a custom JSON marshaller

limited-rainbow-51650 · Answer

limited-rainbow-51650 · Answer

So a substructure of the `params` I receive would be additional stack config I would pass as is via `stack SetAllConfig` At least that was my intent

red-match-15116 · Answer

Ah yeah that makes sense Honestly this is definitely a thing I would love to improve but alas there are too many things

bored-oyster-3147 · Answer

It s even more difficult to support structured config in strongly typed languages like net I put a good amount of effort into trying to do that before we ultimately decided leaving deserialization to the consumer would be the safest way