Allow pulumi.Output in EKS Addon configurationValues
#1632
Conversation
|
PR is now waiting for a maintainer to run the acceptance tests. |
|
PR is now waiting for a maintainer to run the acceptance tests. |
|
PR is now waiting for a maintainer to run the acceptance tests. |
| @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ import { Cluster } from "../cluster"; | |||
| export interface AddonOptions | |||
| extends Omit<aws.eks.AddonArgs, "resolveConflicts" | "clusterName" | "configurationValues"> { | |||
| cluster: Cluster; | |||
| configurationValues?: object; | |||
| configurationValues?: pulumi.Input<object>; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note: This should be a safe change as the API is currently modeled as an Input already (ref) so this isn't a breaking change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Indeed! The types were telling me that an Input should be fine but then it put Calling [toJSON] on an [Output<T>] is not supported in my JSON blob
|
|
||
| const addon = new aws.eks.Addon( | ||
| name, | ||
| { | ||
| ...args, | ||
| clusterName: cluster.core.cluster.name, | ||
| configurationValues: JSON.stringify(args.configurationValues), | ||
| configurationValues: stringifyAddonConfiguration(args.configurationValues), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We might need to be more careful here. stringifyAddonConfiguration changes the ordering, and may cause replacements for existing users. We'll need to test this out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In order to avoid changing the order for users who are already utilising this, would it be safer to just use pulumi.jsonStringify(args.configurationValues) ?
I think it would be safe to assume that if the user required a deterministic order, they would have ran into this issue already and either worked around the wrapper component or implemented their own ordering solution, so it's a bit too late to add now.
Proposed changes
Someone went through the effort of creating a stringify function and forgot to use it 😁