We’ve been using Pulumi as part of the private beta for a couple weeks now. We found out about it right at the tail end before it was opened up. So far, loving it. @pzel has been doing most of the work with it so far and might be able to give folks details if they are interested.
What won me over is the fact that it really is infrastructure-as-code – with emphasis on code. This gives me hope that the ever-encroaching complexity of configuration management can be corralled using tactics developers know from ‘regular programming’: refactoring, abstraction, etc.
This would actually be a very good argument for using a Lisp/Scheme flavor (or Lua, for that matter) as a default configuration language for any tool, instead of all then INI, XML, Toml, Yaml, JSON and others. I think GNU kind of tried to put Guile everywhere, at least on the desktop programs.
Perhaps there is an alternate reality somewhere where people are not allergic to S-Expressions and XML/Json & friends were never invented. I’m not holding my breath, though. Also: Guile + Guix are beautiful tools, and I’d love to see them used more. Alas, that isn’t the case :(
For what it’s worth, Pulumi lets you drive the engine using any language that can speak gRPC, so there’s really no technical reason why a Scheme or Lua front-end to it can’t be built.
Ha! That would be nice :) I find XML an interesting case: the early drafts of XSLT were like Lisp, so people thought about that and then backtracked. That being said, I find XML/XSLT a very powerful combination, although the ergonomics are rather questionable.
We’ve been using Pulumi as part of the private beta for a couple weeks now. We found out about it right at the tail end before it was opened up. So far, loving it. @pzel has been doing most of the work with it so far and might be able to give folks details if they are interested.
Thanks for sharing, the documentation left me a bit confused, so knowing it works in a real world scenario makes me want to know more about it.
What won me over is the fact that it really is infrastructure-as-code – with emphasis on code. This gives me hope that the ever-encroaching complexity of configuration management can be corralled using tactics developers know from ‘regular programming’: refactoring, abstraction, etc.
This would actually be a very good argument for using a Lisp/Scheme flavor (or Lua, for that matter) as a default configuration language for any tool, instead of all then INI, XML, Toml, Yaml, JSON and others. I think GNU kind of tried to put Guile everywhere, at least on the desktop programs.
Perhaps there is an alternate reality somewhere where people are not allergic to S-Expressions and XML/Json & friends were never invented. I’m not holding my breath, though. Also: Guile + Guix are beautiful tools, and I’d love to see them used more. Alas, that isn’t the case :(
For what it’s worth, Pulumi lets you drive the engine using any language that can speak gRPC, so there’s really no technical reason why a Scheme or Lua front-end to it can’t be built.
Ha! That would be nice :) I find XML an interesting case: the early drafts of XSLT were like Lisp, so people thought about that and then backtracked. That being said, I find XML/XSLT a very powerful combination, although the ergonomics are rather questionable.
What’s the difference between Pulumi and Ballerina which was posted here the other day?
Ballerina is a programming language.
Pulumi is more like Terraform. It allows you in variety of languages to control your cloud based infrastructure.