2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* @fileoverview
|
|
|
|
* @enhanceable
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {messageConventions} JS Compiler reports an error if a variable or
|
|
|
|
* field starts with 'MSG_' and isn't a translatable message.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @public
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
// GENERATED CODE -- DO NOT EDIT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
var jspb = require('google-protobuf');
|
|
|
|
var goog = jspb;
|
|
|
|
var global = Function('return this')();
|
|
|
|
|
2017-12-01 21:50:32 +00:00
|
|
|
var plugin_pb = require('./plugin_pb.js');
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var google_protobuf_empty_pb = require('google-protobuf/google/protobuf/empty_pb.js');
|
|
|
|
var google_protobuf_struct_pb = require('google-protobuf/google/protobuf/struct_pb.js');
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse', null, global);
|
2018-04-04 17:08:17 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey', null, global);
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse', null, global);
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges', null, global);
|
2018-06-27 23:08:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed', null, global);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse', null, global);
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse', null, global);
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest', null, global);
|
|
|
|
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse', null, global);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest = function(opt_data) {
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest, jspb.Message);
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest';
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
|
|
|
variablesMap: (f = msg.getVariablesMap()) ? f.toObject(includeInstance, undefined) : []
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest}
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest}
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = msg.getVariablesMap();
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value, function(message, reader) {
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Map.deserializeBinary(message, reader, jspb.BinaryReader.prototype.readString, jspb.BinaryReader.prototype.readString);
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest} message
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
|
|
|
f = message.getVariablesMap(true);
|
|
|
|
if (f && f.getLength() > 0) {
|
|
|
|
f.serializeBinary(1, writer, jspb.BinaryWriter.prototype.writeString, jspb.BinaryWriter.prototype.writeString);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* map<string, string> variables = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_noLazyCreate Do not create the map if
|
|
|
|
* empty, instead returning `undefined`
|
|
|
|
* @return {!jspb.Map<string,string>}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.prototype.getVariablesMap = function(opt_noLazyCreate) {
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type {!jspb.Map<string,string>} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getMapField(this, 1, opt_noLazyCreate,
|
|
|
|
null));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.prototype.clearVariablesMap = function() {
|
2017-08-31 21:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
this.getVariablesMap().clear();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-04-04 17:08:17 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.repeatedFields_, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys, jspb.Message);
|
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys';
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
|
|
|
|
* @private {!Array<number>}
|
|
|
|
* @const
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.repeatedFields_ = [1];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
|
|
|
missingkeysList: jspb.Message.toObjectList(msg.getMissingkeysList(),
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.toObject, includeInstance)
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = new proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.addMissingkeys(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys} message
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
|
|
|
f = message.getMissingkeysList();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeRepeatedMessage(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey, jspb.Message);
|
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey';
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
|
|
|
name: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
|
|
|
description: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, "")
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setName(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setDescription(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey} message
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
|
|
|
f = message.getName();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
f = message.getDescription();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
2,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string name = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.getName = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.setName = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string description = 2;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.getDescription = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.setDescription = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* repeated MissingKey missingKeys = 1;
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey>}
|
2018-04-04 17:08:17 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.getMissingkeysList = function() {
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey>} */ (
|
2018-04-04 17:08:17 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getRepeatedWrapperField(this, proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey, 1));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey>} value */
|
2018-04-04 17:08:17 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.setMissingkeysList = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setRepeatedWrapperField(this, 1, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey=} opt_value
|
|
|
|
* @param {number=} opt_index
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.addMissingkeys = function(opt_value, opt_index) {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.addToRepeatedWrapperField(this, 1, opt_value, proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey, opt_index);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.clearMissingkeysList = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setMissingkeysList([]);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest = function(opt_data) {
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest, jspb.Message);
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest';
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
tok: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
Implement first-class providers. (#1695)
### First-Class Providers
These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class
providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the
Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply
instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured
differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the
outputs of other resources.
### Provider Plugin Changes
In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider
configuration and configure providers without complete configuration
information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin
interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration
and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and
`DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag
accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`.
These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC
interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then,
these methods are implemented by adapters:
- `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string
or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins
only accept string-typed configuration values.
- `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration
values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is
unknown. The justification for this behavior is given
[here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106)
- `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and
configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any
config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and
the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of
which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is
only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we
can manage with the existing gRPC interface.
### Resource Model Changes
Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's
dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created,
may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other
resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which
are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design
addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not
yet been physically created and therefore have no ID.
All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a
single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be
used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's
provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its
URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider
should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically
sorting the dependency graph.
Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the
invocation via a provider reference.
### Engine Changes
First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine:
- The engine must have some way to map from provider references to
provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's
checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during
the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider
resources.
- In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi
programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine
must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package
referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for
a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data.
The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is
responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In
addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability
to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves
as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the
"provider provider").
The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to
plan setup and the eval source.
During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources
that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of
packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been
computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and
prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that
requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default
provider for its package.
While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration,
resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped
before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider
for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source
synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and
records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected
into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a
default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is
used and no new registration occurs.
### SDK Changes
These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK.
- A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used
to instantiate first-class providers.
- A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply
a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD
operations.
- A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that
control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type
includes a `provider` field that is analogous to
`ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
|
|
|
args: (f = msg.getArgs()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
|
|
|
|
provider: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 3, "")
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest}
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest}
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setTok(value);
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setArgs(value);
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
Implement first-class providers. (#1695)
### First-Class Providers
These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class
providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the
Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply
instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured
differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the
outputs of other resources.
### Provider Plugin Changes
In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider
configuration and configure providers without complete configuration
information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin
interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration
and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and
`DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag
accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`.
These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC
interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then,
these methods are implemented by adapters:
- `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string
or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins
only accept string-typed configuration values.
- `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration
values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is
unknown. The justification for this behavior is given
[here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106)
- `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and
configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any
config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and
the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of
which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is
only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we
can manage with the existing gRPC interface.
### Resource Model Changes
Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's
dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created,
may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other
resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which
are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design
addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not
yet been physically created and therefore have no ID.
All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a
single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be
used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's
provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its
URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider
should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically
sorting the dependency graph.
Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the
invocation via a provider reference.
### Engine Changes
First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine:
- The engine must have some way to map from provider references to
provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's
checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during
the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider
resources.
- In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi
programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine
must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package
referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for
a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data.
The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is
responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In
addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability
to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves
as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the
"provider provider").
The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to
plan setup and the eval source.
During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources
that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of
packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been
computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and
prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that
requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default
provider for its package.
While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration,
resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped
before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider
for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source
synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and
records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected
into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a
default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is
used and no new registration occurs.
### SDK Changes
These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK.
- A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used
to instantiate first-class providers.
- A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply
a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD
operations.
- A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that
control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type
includes a `provider` field that is analogous to
`ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
|
|
|
case 3:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setProvider(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest} message
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getTok();
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getArgs();
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
2,
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Implement first-class providers. (#1695)
### First-Class Providers
These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class
providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the
Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply
instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured
differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the
outputs of other resources.
### Provider Plugin Changes
In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider
configuration and configure providers without complete configuration
information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin
interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration
and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and
`DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag
accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`.
These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC
interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then,
these methods are implemented by adapters:
- `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string
or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins
only accept string-typed configuration values.
- `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration
values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is
unknown. The justification for this behavior is given
[here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106)
- `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and
configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any
config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and
the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of
which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is
only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we
can manage with the existing gRPC interface.
### Resource Model Changes
Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's
dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created,
may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other
resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which
are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design
addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not
yet been physically created and therefore have no ID.
All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a
single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be
used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's
provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its
URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider
should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically
sorting the dependency graph.
Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the
invocation via a provider reference.
### Engine Changes
First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine:
- The engine must have some way to map from provider references to
provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's
checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during
the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider
resources.
- In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi
programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine
must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package
referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for
a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data.
The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is
responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In
addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability
to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves
as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the
"provider provider").
The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to
plan setup and the eval source.
During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources
that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of
packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been
computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and
prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that
requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default
provider for its package.
While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration,
resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped
before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider
for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source
synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and
records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected
into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a
default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is
used and no new registration occurs.
### SDK Changes
These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK.
- A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used
to instantiate first-class providers.
- A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply
a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD
operations.
- A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that
control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type
includes a `provider` field that is analogous to
`ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getProvider();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
3,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional string tok = 1;
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.getTok = function() {
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.setTok = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct args = 2;
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.getArgs = function() {
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.setArgs = function(value) {
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.clearArgs = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setArgs(undefined);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.hasArgs = function() {
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement first-class providers. (#1695)
### First-Class Providers
These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class
providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the
Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply
instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured
differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the
outputs of other resources.
### Provider Plugin Changes
In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider
configuration and configure providers without complete configuration
information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin
interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration
and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and
`DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag
accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`.
These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC
interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then,
these methods are implemented by adapters:
- `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string
or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins
only accept string-typed configuration values.
- `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration
values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is
unknown. The justification for this behavior is given
[here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106)
- `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and
configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any
config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and
the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of
which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is
only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we
can manage with the existing gRPC interface.
### Resource Model Changes
Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's
dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created,
may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other
resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which
are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design
addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not
yet been physically created and therefore have no ID.
All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a
single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be
used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's
provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its
URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider
should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically
sorting the dependency graph.
Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the
invocation via a provider reference.
### Engine Changes
First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine:
- The engine must have some way to map from provider references to
provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's
checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during
the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider
resources.
- In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi
programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine
must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package
referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for
a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data.
The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is
responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In
addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability
to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves
as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the
"provider provider").
The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to
plan setup and the eval source.
During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources
that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of
packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been
computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and
prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that
requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default
provider for its package.
While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration,
resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped
before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider
for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source
synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and
records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected
into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a
default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is
used and no new registration occurs.
### SDK Changes
These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK.
- A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used
to instantiate first-class providers.
- A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply
a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD
operations.
- A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that
control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type
includes a `provider` field that is analogous to
`ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string provider = 3;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.getProvider = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 3, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.setProvider = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 3, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-03-03 02:15:38 +00:00
|
|
|
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.repeatedFields_, null);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse, jspb.Message);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse';
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
|
|
|
|
* @private {!Array<number>}
|
|
|
|
* @const
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.repeatedFields_ = [2];
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
pb_return: (f = msg.getReturn()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
failuresList: jspb.Message.toObjectList(msg.getFailuresList(),
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.toObject, includeInstance)
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse}
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse}
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setReturn(value);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.addFailures(value);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse} message
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getReturn();
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
1,
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getFailuresList();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeRepeatedMessage(
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
2,
|
|
|
|
f,
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct return = 1;
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.getReturn = function() {
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 1));
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.setReturn = function(value) {
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 1, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.clearReturn = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setReturn(undefined);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.hasReturn = function() {
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 1) != null;
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* repeated CheckFailure failures = 2;
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>}
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.getFailuresList = function() {
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>} */ (
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getRepeatedWrapperField(this, proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, 2));
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.setFailuresList = function(value) {
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setRepeatedWrapperField(this, 2, value);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure=} opt_value
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {number=} opt_index
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure}
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.addFailures = function(opt_value, opt_index) {
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.addToRepeatedWrapperField(this, 2, opt_value, proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, opt_index);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.clearFailuresList = function() {
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
this.setFailuresList([]);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest = function(opt_data) {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest, jspb.Message);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest';
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
olds: (f = msg.getOlds()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
|
|
|
|
news: (f = msg.getNews()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest}
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest}
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setUrn(value);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setOlds(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 3:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.setNews(value);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest} message
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getUrn();
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getOlds();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
2,
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getNews();
|
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
|
|
|
3,
|
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional string urn = 1;
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct olds = 2;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.getOlds = function() {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.setOlds = function(value) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.clearOlds = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setOlds(undefined);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.hasOlds = function() {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct news = 3;
|
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.getNews = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.setNews = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.clearNews = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setNews(undefined);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.hasNews = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redo object monikers
This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism,
generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to
collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping"
plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this
is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the
source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state.
Each moniker has four parts:
<Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name>
wherein each element is the following:
<Namespace> The namespace being deployed into
<AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated
<Type> The type of the resource
<Name> The assigned name of the resource
The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod",
"stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future
namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now
this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94.
The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new'
that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to
extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice
aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as
they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.)
The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted
via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider
does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource
may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`);
for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property
that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups,
via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable
that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda
whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents).
This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker
collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.repeatedFields_, null);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse, jspb.Message);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse';
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
|
|
|
|
* @private {!Array<number>}
|
|
|
|
* @const
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.repeatedFields_ = [2];
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
inputs: (f = msg.getInputs()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
failuresList: jspb.Message.toObjectList(msg.getFailuresList(),
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.toObject, includeInstance)
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setInputs(value);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
case 2:
|
|
|
|
var value = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.addFailures(value);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse} message
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getInputs();
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
1,
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getFailuresList();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeRepeatedMessage(
|
|
|
|
2,
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct inputs = 1;
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.getInputs = function() {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 1));
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.setInputs = function(value) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 1, value);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.clearInputs = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setInputs(undefined);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2017-12-03 00:34:16 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.hasInputs = function() {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 1) != null;
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* repeated CheckFailure failures = 2;
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>}
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.getFailuresList = function() {
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>} */ (
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getRepeatedWrapperField(this, proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, 2));
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.setFailuresList = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setRepeatedWrapperField(this, 2, value);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure=} opt_value
|
|
|
|
* @param {number=} opt_index
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.addFailures = function(opt_value, opt_index) {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.addToRepeatedWrapperField(this, 2, opt_value, proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, opt_index);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.clearFailuresList = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setFailuresList([]);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, jspb.Message);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure';
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
property: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
|
|
|
reason: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, "")
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setProperty(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setReason(value);
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure} message
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getProperty();
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getReason();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
2,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional string property = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.getProperty = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.setProperty = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional string reason = 2;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.getReason = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.setReason = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest = function(opt_data) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest, jspb.Message);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest';
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
|
|
|
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, ""),
|
|
|
|
olds: (f = msg.getOlds()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
|
|
|
|
news: (f = msg.getNews()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setId(value);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setUrn(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 3:
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setOlds(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 4:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.setNews(value);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest} message
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
|
|
|
f = message.getId();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
f = message.getUrn();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
2,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
f = message.getOlds();
|
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
|
|
|
3,
|
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
f = message.getNews();
|
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
|
|
|
4,
|
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string id = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.getId = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.setId = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string urn = 2;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct olds = 3;
|
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.getOlds = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.setOlds = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.clearOlds = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setOlds(undefined);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.hasOlds = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct news = 4;
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.getNews = function() {
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 4));
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.setNews = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 4, value);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.clearNews = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setNews(undefined);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.hasNews = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 4) != null;
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.repeatedFields_, null);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse, jspb.Message);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse';
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
|
|
|
|
* @private {!Array<number>}
|
|
|
|
* @const
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.repeatedFields_ = [1,2];
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
replacesList: jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(msg, 1),
|
2017-12-10 16:37:22 +00:00
|
|
|
stablesList: jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(msg, 2),
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
deletebeforereplace: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 3, false),
|
|
|
|
changes: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 4, 0)
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.addReplaces(value);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.addStables(value);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
2017-12-10 16:37:22 +00:00
|
|
|
case 3:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {boolean} */ (reader.readBool());
|
|
|
|
msg.setDeletebeforereplace(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
case 4:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges} */ (reader.readEnum());
|
|
|
|
msg.setChanges(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse} message
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getReplacesList();
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
writer.writeRepeatedString(
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getStablesList();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeRepeatedString(
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
2,
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-12-10 16:37:22 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getDeletebeforereplace();
|
|
|
|
if (f) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeBool(
|
|
|
|
3,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getChanges();
|
|
|
|
if (f !== 0.0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeEnum(
|
|
|
|
4,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* @enum {number}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges = {
|
|
|
|
DIFF_UNKNOWN: 0,
|
|
|
|
DIFF_NONE: 1,
|
|
|
|
DIFF_SOME: 2
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* repeated string replaces = 1;
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Array.<string>}
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.getReplacesList = function() {
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type {!Array.<string>} */ (jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(this, 1));
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {!Array.<string>} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.setReplacesList = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setField(this, 1, value || []);
|
2017-08-01 01:26:15 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!string} value
|
|
|
|
* @param {number=} opt_index
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.addReplaces = function(value, opt_index) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.addToRepeatedField(this, 1, value, opt_index);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.clearReplacesList = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setReplacesList([]);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* repeated string stables = 2;
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Array.<string>}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.getStablesList = function() {
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type {!Array.<string>} */ (jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(this, 2));
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {!Array.<string>} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.setStablesList = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setField(this, 2, value || []);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!string} value
|
|
|
|
* @param {number=} opt_index
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.addStables = function(value, opt_index) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.addToRepeatedField(this, 2, value, opt_index);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.clearStablesList = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setStablesList([]);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-12-10 16:37:22 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional bool deleteBeforeReplace = 3;
|
|
|
|
* Note that Boolean fields may be set to 0/1 when serialized from a Java server.
|
|
|
|
* You should avoid comparisons like {@code val === true/false} in those cases.
|
|
|
|
* @return {boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.getDeletebeforereplace = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {boolean} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 3, false));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {boolean} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.setDeletebeforereplace = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3BooleanField(this, 3, value);
|
2017-12-10 16:37:22 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional DiffChanges changes = 4;
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.getChanges = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 4, 0));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.setChanges = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3EnumField(this, 4, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest = function(opt_data) {
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest, jspb.Message);
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest';
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
|
|
|
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest}
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest}
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
2017-08-31 20:10:55 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setUrn(value);
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
case 2:
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setProperties(value);
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest} message
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
2017-08-31 20:10:55 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getUrn();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getProperties();
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
2,
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional string urn = 1;
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 2;
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.getProperties = function() {
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setProperties(undefined);
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
|
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3)
This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary
to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90.
In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which
represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T,
that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely,
operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s.
During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties
are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property
value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check,
Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have
been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties
have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to
make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction.
For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead
to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by
supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we
want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an
additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3.
Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner
than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will
correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the
evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and
so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse = function(opt_data) {
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse, jspb.Message);
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse';
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse}
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse}
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setId(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.setProperties(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse} message
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getId();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getProperties();
|
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
2,
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional string id = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.getId = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.setId = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 2;
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.getProperties = function() {
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
this.setProperties(undefined);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
|
2017-07-18 01:44:45 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest, jspb.Message);
|
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest';
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
|
|
|
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
|
|
|
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, ""),
|
|
|
|
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setId(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setUrn(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 3:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.setProperties(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest} message
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
|
|
|
f = message.getId();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
f = message.getUrn();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
2,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
f = message.getProperties();
|
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
|
|
|
3,
|
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string id = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.getId = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.setId = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string urn = 2;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 3;
|
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.getProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setProperties(undefined);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse, jspb.Message);
|
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse';
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
2018-04-10 19:58:50 +00:00
|
|
|
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
2018-04-10 19:58:50 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setId(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.setProperties(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse} message
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
2018-04-10 19:58:50 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getId();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getProperties();
|
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
2018-04-10 19:58:50 +00:00
|
|
|
2,
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
2018-04-10 19:58:50 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional string id = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.getId = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.setId = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 2;
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.getProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
2018-04-10 19:58:50 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
|
2018-04-10 19:58:50 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setProperties(undefined);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
|
2018-04-10 19:58:50 +00:00
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
|
2018-04-05 14:00:16 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest = function(opt_data) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest, jspb.Message);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest';
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Implement resource provider plugins
This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to,
and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins.
In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached
state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be
a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and
between whom. This context also controls per-resource context
allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured
cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests.
Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of
two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of
"mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with
any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard
library installation location, which need not be on the path for this
to work (since we know precisely where to look).
If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process.
The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their
own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to
pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line
to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT
that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it
pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc).
Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create
a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven
by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC
calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near
future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error"
mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is,
errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint,
which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
|
|
|
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
2017-08-31 20:10:55 +00:00
|
|
|
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, ""),
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
olds: (f = msg.getOlds()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
|
|
|
|
news: (f = msg.getNews()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setId(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
Implement resource provider plugins
This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to,
and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins.
In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached
state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be
a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and
between whom. This context also controls per-resource context
allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured
cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests.
Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of
two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of
"mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with
any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard
library installation location, which need not be on the path for this
to work (since we know precisely where to look).
If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process.
The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their
own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to
pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line
to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT
that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it
pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc).
Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create
a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven
by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC
calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near
future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error"
mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is,
errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint,
which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
|
|
|
case 2:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
2017-08-31 20:10:55 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setUrn(value);
|
Implement resource provider plugins
This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to,
and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins.
In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached
state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be
a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and
between whom. This context also controls per-resource context
allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured
cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests.
Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of
two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of
"mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with
any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard
library installation location, which need not be on the path for this
to work (since we know precisely where to look).
If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process.
The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their
own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to
pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line
to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT
that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it
pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc).
Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create
a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven
by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC
calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near
future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error"
mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is,
errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint,
which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
|
|
|
case 3:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setOlds(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 4:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.setNews(value);
|
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest} message
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
|
|
|
f = message.getId();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-08-31 20:10:55 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getUrn();
|
Implement resource provider plugins
This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to,
and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins.
In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached
state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be
a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and
between whom. This context also controls per-resource context
allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured
cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests.
Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of
two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of
"mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with
any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard
library installation location, which need not be on the path for this
to work (since we know precisely where to look).
If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process.
The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their
own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to
pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line
to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT
that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it
pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc).
Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create
a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven
by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC
calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near
future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error"
mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is,
errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint,
which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
2,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getOlds();
|
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
|
|
|
3,
|
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getNews();
|
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
|
|
|
4,
|
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string id = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.getId = function() {
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.setId = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
2017-02-10 17:28:46 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement resource provider plugins
This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to,
and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins.
In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached
state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be
a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and
between whom. This context also controls per-resource context
allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured
cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests.
Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of
two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of
"mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with
any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard
library installation location, which need not be on the path for this
to work (since we know precisely where to look).
If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process.
The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their
own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to
pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line
to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT
that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it
pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc).
Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create
a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven
by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC
calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near
future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error"
mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is,
errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint,
which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
2017-08-31 20:10:55 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional string urn = 2;
|
Implement resource provider plugins
This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to,
and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins.
In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached
state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be
a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and
between whom. This context also controls per-resource context
allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured
cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests.
Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of
two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of
"mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with
any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard
library installation location, which need not be on the path for this
to work (since we know precisely where to look).
If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process.
The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their
own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to
pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line
to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT
that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it
pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc).
Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create
a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven
by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC
calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near
future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error"
mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is,
errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint,
which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
|
Implement resource provider plugins
This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to,
and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins.
In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached
state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be
a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and
between whom. This context also controls per-resource context
allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured
cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests.
Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of
two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of
"mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with
any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard
library installation location, which need not be on the path for this
to work (since we know precisely where to look).
If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process.
The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their
own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to
pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line
to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT
that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it
pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc).
Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create
a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven
by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC
calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near
future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error"
mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is,
errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint,
which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
|
Implement resource provider plugins
This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to,
and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins.
In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached
state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be
a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and
between whom. This context also controls per-resource context
allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured
cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests.
Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of
two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of
"mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with
any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard
library installation location, which need not be on the path for this
to work (since we know precisely where to look).
If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process.
The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their
own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to
pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line
to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT
that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it
pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc).
Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create
a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven
by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC
calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near
future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error"
mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is,
errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint,
which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct olds = 3;
|
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.getOlds = function() {
|
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.setOlds = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.clearOlds = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setOlds(undefined);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.hasOlds = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct news = 4;
|
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.getNews = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 4));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.setNews = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 4, value);
|
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.clearNews = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setNews(undefined);
|
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.hasNews = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 4) != null;
|
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse = function(opt_data) {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse, jspb.Message);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse';
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse}
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse}
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
msg.setProperties(value);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse} message
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getProperties();
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
1,
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 1;
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.getProperties = function() {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 1));
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 1, value);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setProperties(undefined);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 1) != null;
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest, jspb.Message);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest';
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
|
|
|
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, ""),
|
|
|
|
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest}
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest}
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setId(value);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setUrn(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 3:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.setProperties(value);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest} message
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
Implement components
This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi
Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where
we are still discussing some of the finer points.
In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's
entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents
something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to
be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations.
For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type.
It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface.
All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples.
To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource
provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource.
All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely
a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide
attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource
graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details).
Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the
only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance:
+ aws:serverless:Function: (create)
[urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda]
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0
=> urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda
The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked
in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getId();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
1,
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f = message.getUrn();
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
2,
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
f = message.getProperties();
|
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
|
|
|
3,
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
f,
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional string id = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.getId = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.setId = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string urn = 2;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
|
2018-02-21 23:11:21 +00:00
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 3;
|
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.getProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setProperties(undefined);
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add a notion of stable properties
This change adds the capability for a resource provider to indicate
that, where an action carried out in response to a diff, a certain set
of properties would be "stable"; that is to say, they are guaranteed
not to change. As a result, properties may be resolved to their final
values during previewing, avoiding erroneous cascading impacts.
This avoids the ever-annoying situation I keep running into when demoing:
when adding or removing an ingress rule to a security group, we ripple
the impact through the instance, and claim it must be replaced, because
that instance depends on the security group via its name. Well, the name
is a great example of a stable property, in that it will never change, and
so this is truly unfortunate and always adds uncertainty into the demos.
Particularly since the actual update doesn't need to perform replacements.
This resolves pulumi/pulumi#330.
2017-10-04 12:22:21 +00:00
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
|
2017-09-20 00:23:10 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-27 23:08:21 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
|
|
|
|
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
|
|
|
|
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
|
|
|
|
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
|
|
|
|
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
|
|
|
|
* valid.
|
|
|
|
* @extends {jspb.Message}
|
|
|
|
* @constructor
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed = function(opt_data) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.repeatedFields_, null);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed, jspb.Message);
|
|
|
|
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed';
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
|
|
|
|
* @private {!Array<number>}
|
|
|
|
* @const
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.repeatedFields_ = [3];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
|
|
|
|
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
|
|
|
|
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
|
|
|
|
* For the list of reserved names please see:
|
|
|
|
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
|
|
|
|
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
|
|
|
|
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
|
|
|
|
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
|
|
|
|
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed} msg The msg instance to transform.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Object}
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
|
|
|
|
var f, obj = {
|
|
|
|
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
|
|
|
|
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
|
|
|
|
reasonsList: jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(msg, 3)
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (includeInstance) {
|
|
|
|
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return obj;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
|
|
|
|
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
|
|
|
|
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed;
|
|
|
|
return proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
|
|
|
|
* given reader into the given message object.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed} msg The message object to deserialize into.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
|
|
|
|
while (reader.nextField()) {
|
|
|
|
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
|
|
|
|
switch (field) {
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.setId(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 2:
|
|
|
|
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
|
|
|
|
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
|
|
|
|
msg.setProperties(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
case 3:
|
|
|
|
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
|
|
|
|
msg.addReasons(value);
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
reader.skipField();
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return msg;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
|
|
|
|
* @return {!Uint8Array}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
|
|
|
|
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
|
|
|
|
return writer.getResultBuffer();
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
|
|
|
|
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
|
|
|
|
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed} message
|
|
|
|
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
|
|
|
|
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
|
|
|
|
var f = undefined;
|
|
|
|
f = message.getId();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeString(
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
f = message.getProperties();
|
|
|
|
if (f != null) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeMessage(
|
|
|
|
2,
|
|
|
|
f,
|
|
|
|
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
f = message.getReasonsList();
|
|
|
|
if (f.length > 0) {
|
|
|
|
writer.writeRepeatedString(
|
|
|
|
3,
|
|
|
|
f
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional string id = 1;
|
|
|
|
* @return {string}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.getId = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {string} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.setId = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 2;
|
|
|
|
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.getProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setProperties(undefined);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Returns whether this field is set.
|
|
|
|
* @return {!boolean}
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
|
|
|
|
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* repeated string reasons = 3;
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
* @return {!Array.<string>}
|
2018-06-27 23:08:21 +00:00
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.getReasonsList = function() {
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
return /** @type {!Array.<string>} */ (jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(this, 3));
|
2018-06-27 23:08:21 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-06-29 23:14:49 +00:00
|
|
|
/** @param {!Array.<string>} value */
|
2018-06-27 23:08:21 +00:00
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.setReasonsList = function(value) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.setField(this, 3, value || []);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* @param {!string} value
|
|
|
|
* @param {number=} opt_index
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.addReasons = function(value, opt_index) {
|
|
|
|
jspb.Message.addToRepeatedField(this, 3, value, opt_index);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.clearReasonsList = function() {
|
|
|
|
this.setReasonsList([]);
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-09-22 02:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
goog.object.extend(exports, proto.pulumirpc);
|