• The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s where I’m at too. Philosophically its a bummer. For the majority of users of their codebase however, this presents zero changes and the only entity I known of who would be impacted by this change going forward is AWS

    • Illecors@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      So I was trying to figure out what are they getting defensive against. It was clear in redhat’s case, but I only really found pulumi as some sort of alternative to terraform and I’m not even sure it relies on it. What is the AWS product that’s competing here?

      • ck_@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Pulumi relies on Terraform providers, it can actually “plug in” any Terraform provider. This won’t be much of a problem though, as Hashicorp has pushed the work of developing and maintaining providers to its “partners”. Even providers under the Hashicorp umbrella like AWS is not actively developed by hashicorp personell so there is really no play here, as is reflected by them not touching the license in those repositories.

    • allywilson@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Curious, how will AWS be affected? I’m not familiar with all of Hashicorp’s tools. Mostly just Terraform (and obvs AWS had Cloud Formation, then CDK - they even worked with HashiCorp I believe to build CDKTF).