Deployment

[nickschuch]

Deployments have now become stable as a part of release v1.9.0

This pull request is a few things:

• Asking if you this project is now interesting in accepting the kubernetes_deployment resource now that 1.9.0 has landed.
• If I am on the right path with this approach. I still have quite a bit of polish to put on this so wanted to ask early.

This is my first contribution to the Terraform community so would love to hear any feedback you want to give!

I am also very interested in also contributing the "DaemonSet" resource!

I used dep to bump the client libraries up to "release-1.9.0". Would you be interested in switching to Dep or is there some guidance I could get on bumping with go-vendor?

[sl1pm4t]

@nickschuch - just a heads up, most of the (previously beta) workload resources have already been developed and are available in various community forks of this provider.
I've collected most/all of them up in the custom branch of my fork and added some resources myself, so I recommend you check it out before spending too much developing them from scratch.
It has DaemonSet, Deployment, StatefulSet, Ingress etc.

Some of them still need documentation and acceptance tests, but are otherwise fully functional. We've been using the Deployment in our production environment for a few months.

I'll also start sending PR's across to this repo now that these resources are GA.

[nickschuch]

No worries, looking at the fork I can see a few things:

• Schema is missing a bunch of fields
• Modeled off the replica, which we will want it to use more "Deployment" style logic to wait for when its finished. (That code can be found in the kubelet).

Would you be open to a collaboration?

[sl1pm4t]

@nickschuch - yes happy to Collaborate.
Are you able to update the vendored Kubernetes client packages using govendor, which seems to be the preferred vendoring tool of Hashicorp / Terraform.
I'll then send a PR for the kubernetes_deployment resource in my fork, and we can beat it into shape.

[nickschuch]

No worries! Ill get govendor another crack today and report back.

[dmathieu]

@nickschuch do you need help finishing this PR?

[nickschuch]

Hey hey! That would be great. I will be back onto my regular schedule programming next week :)

[moritzheiber]

Can we get this baby on the road? 🙂

[travisjeffery]

I've wrote a version for us at Confluent we've had shipped in prod for months now. I'll ship it this week. Gotta add tests and docs.

[nickschuch]

Yup, I have one here as well https://github.com/previousnext/terraform-provider-k8s (has a bunch of missing APIs).

I will revisit this issue this week.

[acobaugh]

@sl1pm4t I'm also willing to help test, as I desperately need the deployment resource. I'm making do with your fork, but I've already found a bug (can't set strategy type to "Recreate"). Let me know what I can do to help or file issues.

[joshperry]

I'm happy to pitch in as well. Can we come to an agreement on a fork to pursue so that I'm not wasting cycles? I did about a 1/3 impl before I saw this PR, so I'm somewhat fresh with the codebase.

[pdecat]

Hi @nickschuch,

I used dep to bump the client libraries up to "release-1.9.0". Would you be interested in switching to Dep or is there some guidance I could get on bumping with go-vendor?

I was looking into doing the same and found out the upgrade from client-go v4 to v5+ is not that easy.
Nice work!

What would you think about submitting a separate PR to upgrade the client libs with only those two commits?

https://github.com/nickschuch/terraform-provider-kubernetes/commit/c7dcbf2abb2aa8ced4b2c88fa7f9b8458aaf061d
https://github.com/nickschuch/terraform-provider-kubernetes/commit/aaff7e9c1dcbd73f716e77aff784886fda0538a8

Apparently, an additional make fmt is required to fix the build.

Edit: I spoke too fast as building the provider with those updates is currently broken.
The google provider depends on several revisions of the google.golang.org/api project subpackages. However, dep only allows constraints on the root of projects so those different dependencies cannot be resolved correctly.
I guess moving to dep won't be implemented in the short term by terraform providers because of this.

I've put together PR #117 to upgrade k8s libs to 1.9 with govendor reusing https://github.com/nickschuch/terraform-provider-kubernetes/commit/aaff7e9c1dcbd73f716e77aff784886fda0538a8

[djhaskin987]

Just wanted to ask if there's anything I can do to help with this PR . I'm a huge fan of getting this done

[austinkelleher]

@radeksimko What is it going to take to get this merged? This PR has been open for 2.5 months and really is crucial to using the Kubernetes Terraform provider for many applications.

[bassrock]

@austinkelleher Look at https://github.com/sl1pm4t/terraform-provider-kubernetes it has deployments and more and is constantly maintained with these upstream changes.

[austinkelleher]

@bassrock I'm currently using that, but I'd really like to see deployments becoming a part of core terrafor-provider-kubernetes. There's no reason why a fork should have to be maintained at this point. The original argument for not allowing these changes into the core provider plugin was because Kubernetes deployments were in a beta API. Now this feature is out of beta and is a part of the v1 API version.

/cc @radeksimko

[george-oakling]

Yes, please, make it to mainline :)

[peterver]

using the custom one as well at the moment, but would love seeing this in mainline as well :)

[costimuraru]

👍 would love to see this merged

[jaceq]

Any update here?

[alexsomesan]

@nickschuch We've recently merged an update of the K8S client libraries to 1.10.
Would you be able to rebase this PR and remove the dep vendoring commit (you'll be able to make use of the newly merged client libraries).
We plan to switch dependency management to Go modules quite soon.

[nickschuch]

Thanks @alexsomesan ! I'll sort it out today!

[nickschuch]

Rebased!

How shall I proceed?

[alexsomesan]

@nickschuch Looks good. Do you have anymore changes you'd like to add to this PR?

Otherwise I would say we merge it and work on acceptance tests, which are missing. Normally we'd not merge a PR without any kind of tests, but since this has been sitting for so long and we'd like to get the ball rolling again with the K8S provider I feel we can work on tests next and merge it now.

[nickschuch]

That sounds great @alexsomesan !

[zimbatm]

OMG. Kubernetes Deployments in terraform!

[Starefossen]

Now we only need to get #73 merged and then we can have a party 🎉 Keep up the good work everyone ❤️

[adrianlop]

hey guys,

looks like docs weren't updated: https://www.terraform.io/docs/providers/kubernetes/
but there's a new release of the kubernetes provider, so I guess the Deployment resource is available?

can anyone confirm please?
thank you in advance!

[alexsomesan]

@adrianlop This is true. Issue was caused by me not being familiar with the website deployment process.
I'm in the middle of fixing it.

[alexsomesan]

Done. Deployment docs are here: https://www.terraform.io/docs/providers/kubernetes/r/deployment.html

[adrianlop]

that was fast mate @alexsomesan thank you very much!!

[andyvanosdale]

I'm looking at the update portion. Once it has updated the deployment, it seems it calls waitForDesiredReplicasFunc rather than waitForDeploymentReplicasFunc. Was this desired? I'm getting an issue where the replicationcontroller is not created and the apply fails.

[alexsomesan]

@enozero Let me take a look...

[andyvanosdale]

Thanks, @alexsomesan! I filed #210 to track.