Init terraform state migration RFC #5
Conversation
Signed-off-by: nicklathe <n.lathe@sap.com>
| # Future possibilities | ||
| [future-possibilities]: #future-possibilities | ||
|
|
||
| As mentioned in this RFC, this is an MVP level solution to onboarding. This |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we add something here about how this is specific to importing Stack created infrastructure and that future iterations might support terraform more generally?
| the Terraform state from the user's existing S3 bucket, and push it to Scipian's | ||
| S3 backend. | ||
|
|
||
| # Reference-level explanation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the structure of the state stored in Scipian's S3 bucket? Mostly I'm wondering if the namespace is apart of the structure to avoid different teams accidentally overwriting each other's terraform state? Or maybe we will handle possible overwriting a different way?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it be worth adding a mapping here from what the current stack state looks like to what the scipian state would look like?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't get into the specifics of Scipian's backend structure here, since this RFC will not change that. If we feel it would be helpful to specify that here, I'm happy to add it. It's <scipian-bucket>/namespace/workspace/terraform.tfstate
|
Update: I changed the wording in the RFC to reference the fact that Scipian will store Terraform state in a cusomter's S3 bucket, vs. Scipian's own S3 bucket. |
nicklathe
force-pushed
the
feature/terraform-state-migration
branch
from
bac4cd9
to
b89992e
Compare
|
After @dragan's and my discussion, I've changed the wording of this RFC back to include a managed Scipian S3 backend. |
Terraform state migration RFC