- RFC PR: concourse/rfcs#31
- Concourse Issue: concourse/concourse#5814
This RFC proposes a new set_pipeline
step type for configuring pipelines within a build plan.
Lots of folks are already using the concourse-pipeline
resource, however the resource has two fatal flaws:
- Users have to configure a local auth user and pass it to the resource definition.
- The resource is versioned independently of the user's Concourse, meaning the
fly
version won't always be in sync. The resource makes an attempt to resolve this by doing async
after logging in, but this is a pretty clunky problem regardless.
If we had native support for a set_pipeline
step, both of these problems would go away.
By having a set_pipeline
step in the build plan, we can start to improve Concourse's story around automating the full CI stack for projects of all sizes. Users can start to trust that pipelines are always configured via CI, and they can go over the build history to see who changed what and when.
Later RFCs (namely, 'projects' and 'instanced pipelines') will build on this idea to provide a truly continuous workflow for automating pipelines - including their automatic archival when they're no longer needed.
Using the step would look something like this:
plan:
- get: ci
- set_pipeline: concourse
file: ci/pipelines/concourse.yml
The x
in set_pipeline: x
is the pipeline name, and file:
would be used to specify the pipeline config.
The pipeline would be configured within whichever team the build execution belongs to.
Upon first configuration the pipeline will be automatically unpaused, as opposed to fly set-pipeline
which puts newly configured pipelines in paused state by default. The assumption here is that if you're automating set_pipeline
you're not just kicking the tires and can probably trust the pipelines that you're configuring are correct, at least enough to have made it into version control.
When configuring an existing pipeline, however, the pipeline's paused status will not be changed. In other words, the set_pipeline
step will leave already-existing paused pipelines in the paused state. The assumption here is that the pipeline has been manually paused by a pipeline operator, possibly in response to an emergent situation, and it should be left alone.
Additionally, we should support vars
(as in fly set-pipeline -y
) and var_files
(i.e. fly set-pipeline -l
):
plan:
- get: ci
- set_pipeline: release
file: ci/pipelines/release.yml
vars: {release_version: 5.3}
var_files:
- ci/pipelines/vars/foo.yml
When using fly set-pipeline
to update a pipeline that has been configured
through the set_pipeline
step, a warning will be printed and a confirmation
dialogue will be presented.
When configured through fly set-pipeline
thereafter, warnings will no
longer be issued.
This is to prevent accidentally configuring changes that will be blown away, while still allowing pipeline operators to take over its configuration if needed.
There are a few extended pieces of functionality that have been proposed. There is currently no consensus on these being the ideal long-term design, because there are alternative methods we're planning that should make them unnecessary.
However, there is value in supporting them "until we get there." We can implement support for them, and include a warning both in their usage and in the documentation that they may be removed in the future.
Each experiment must have an easy-to-find GitHub Discussion so that we can collect feedback on how the feature is used and confirm that the long-term design addresses the core need appropriately.
Currently, the foo
in set_pipeline: foo
is the name of a pipeline to set. A
pipeline could technically update itself by configuring its own name in the
step, but pipeline configs aren't meant to contain their own name, as doing so
prevents the config from being re-used as a 'pipeline template'. You could of
course turn this into a var, but that's a little clunky to use.
To support self-updating pipelines without making them self-aware, we can allow
the keyword self
to mean the current pipeline. There is precedent for such a
keyword in other fields like version: every
, version: latest
, inputs: all
, and inputs: detect
.
One downside of this approach is it doesn't cover the full lifecycle of the
pipeline: who set it initially, so that the set_pipeline: self
step can even
run?
This is a question that will likely be answered by the Projects concept once it's introduced. Projects are designed to be the authoritative source for pipeline configuration, covering both the initial creation and the later updating of all pipelines contained therein.
As such, it will be a little odd to support both set_pipeline: self
and
Projects side-by-side. But until Projects lands, there is benefit in allowing
it so that we can confirm that Projects covers all the use cases for it by
analyzing user feedback.
The set_pipeline
step is designed to be a "piece of the puzzle" - just like
other steps like get
, put
, and task
.
It is designed to operate against one pipeline, in the current team, and in
the current Concourse cluster. This is in contrast to the
concourse-pipeline
resource, which supports
setting many pipelines across many teams within any Concourse cluster.
This step is not intended to be a drop-in replacement for the
concourse-pipeline
resource, but it is a goal to deprecate it. However
full deprecation is blocked on further development around the Projects
concept or other ideas that lead towards auto-configuring the
full Concourse cluster.
The concourse-pipeline
resource provides significant enough burden to
maintainers and users that it is probably wise to expedite its deprecation
without waiting on these farther-off goals. To this end, we can
experimentally support setting pipelines in other teams by configuring a
team:
field on the step:
set_pipeline: foo
team: bar
file: ci/foo.yml
This must only work if the step is being run by an admin team (i.e. main
),
making its usage somewhat limited. Once a more suitable replacement arrives
this field can be removed.
n/a
-
Should we support glob expansion in
var_files
?The
concourse-pipeline
resource supports this by just performing glob expansion against its local filesystem. For theset_pipeline
step, this is a bit more challenging - there is no local filesystem. Would we have to implement glob expansion in the Baggageclaim API or something? How easily would this translate to other runtimes?This is a question we'll probably have to answer for various different steps, so it should probably be addressed outside of this RFC.
Deprecating the concourse-pipeline
resource should be the primary goal.
Some of the extended functionality of the resource will not be supported in the name of keeping the set_pipeline
step design simple and easy to reason about.
For example, the step should only ever configure one pipeline at a time - it should not support the pipelines:
functionality for configuring a bunch at once.
Similarly, the step should not support fully dynamic configuration (pipelines_file:
).