Deployment Quality Specification 1.0 Release Candidate¶
Hidden Information
The document does not specify quality assignments at this stage.
Quick Tip #1
Elements in graphs can be clicked to open their type definition!
Quick Tip #2
You can query deployment qualities for your deployment scenario using vintner utils scenarios!
This document specifies the deployment qualities. The specification is under active development and is not backwards compatible with any previous versions.
Deployment Technologies¶
Deployment qualities are defined in the context of the following deployment technologies.
Ansible¶
Ansible is an automation tool primarily used for configuration management, application deployment, and task automation. It allows system administrators and DevOps teams to manage software on servers using SSH, without the need for agents on target nodes. Ansible uses simple, human-readable YAML files called playbooks to define tasks and configurations, enabling consistent management of IT environments across multiple servers. Find out more.
Terraform¶
Terraform is an infrastructure as code (IaC) tool that allows users to define, provision, and manage cloud infrastructure in a consistent, automated, and reproducible way. Using a declarative configuration language called HashiCorp Configuration Language (HCL), Terraform enables users to define infrastructure components such as virtual machines, networks, and storage in human-readable configuration files. It supports a wide range of cloud providers, including AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, and many others, allowing for seamless multi-cloud management. By applying these configurations, Terraform creates and manages the defined resources through APIs. Find out more.
Kubernetes¶
Kubernetes is a system for automating the deployment, scaling, and management of containerized applications, offering production-grade container orchestration. It provides a platform for running and managing applications in clusters of servers, ensuring high availability, scalability, and efficient resource utilization. Kubernetes allows users to define the desired state of their applications using declarative manifests, which specify the configuration, deployment, and management of containerized workloads. By continuously monitoring and adjusting the cluster to match these desired states, Kubernetes simplifies the application deployment process, supports automated rollouts and rollbacks, and ensures the self-healing of applications. Find out more.
Docker Compose¶
Docker Compose is a tool that enables the definition and running of multi-container applications on a Docker Engine, using a single YAML configuration file. It allows the management of services, networks, and volumes, in a declarative manner. Compose is particularly suited for single-host deployments, providing a consistent environment across various stages of the application lifecycle. However, it is limited to working within the Docker ecosystem. Find out more.
Component "docker.engine"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type docker.engine with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type docker.engine is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #2¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type docker.engine is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Component "gcp.service"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type gcp.service with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type gcp.service is deployed. The scenario does not require a specific hosting.
Ansible has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible provides a declarative module
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Component "ingress"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type ingress with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type ingress is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type kubernetes.cluster.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is more specialized.
Kubernetes has good quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is more specialized.
Scenario #2¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type ingress is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #3¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type ingress is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Component "mysql.database"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type mysql.database with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.database is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type mysql.dbms, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 3" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Docker Compose has bad quality for this scenario!
One-time use docker container ("fake Kubernetes job") with imperative parts, while other technologies provide declarative modules.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Scenario #2¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.database is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type mysql.dbms, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 3" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Docker Compose has bad quality for this scenario!
One-time use docker container ("fake Kubernetes job") with imperative parts, while other technologies provide declarative modules.
Terraform has moderate quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module. However, Terraform requires an SSH workaround. Ansible is more specialized.
Scenario #3¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.database is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type mysql.dbms, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type gcp.cloudsql.
Ansible has bad quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. However, need to install and handle GCP CloudSQL Proxy, while the corresponding Terraform module already provides this.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Scenario #4¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.database is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type mysql.dbms, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type kubernetes.cluster.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Kubernetes has bad quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes Job with imperative parts, while declarative other technologies provide declarative modules.
Terraform has poor quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized.
Scenario #5¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.database is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type mysql.dbms, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Scenario #6¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.database is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type mysql.dbms, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module. However, Terraform requires an SSH workaround. Ansible is more specialized.
Component "mysql.dbms"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type mysql.dbms with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.dbms is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type dbms.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized
Docker Compose has good quality for this scenario!
Docker is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Scenario #2¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.dbms is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type dbms.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized
Docker Compose has good quality for this scenario!
Docker is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Scenario #3¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.dbms is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type dbms.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type gcp.cloudsql.
Ansible has bad quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Scenario #4¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.dbms is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type dbms.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type kubernetes.cluster.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is more specialized.
Kubernetes has good quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is more specialized.
Scenario #5¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.dbms is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type dbms.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #6¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type mysql.dbms is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type dbms.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Component "object.storage"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type object.storage with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type object.storage is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type gcp.cloudstorage.
Ansible has bad quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Scenario #2¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type object.storage is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type minio.server, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 3" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Docker Compose has bad quality for this scenario!
One-time use docker container ("fake Kubernetes job") with imperative parts, while other technologies provide declarative modules.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Scenario #3¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type object.storage is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type minio.server, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 3" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Docker Compose has bad quality for this scenario!
One-time use docker container ("fake Kubernetes job") with imperative parts, while other technologies provide declarative modules.
Terraform has moderate quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module. However, Terraform requires an SSH workaround. Ansible is more specialized.
Scenario #4¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type object.storage is deployed. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type minio.server, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type kubernetes.cluster.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Kubernetes has bad quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes Job with imperative parts, while declarative other technologies provide declarative modules.
Terraform has poor quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized.
Component "redis.server"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type redis.server with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type redis.server is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type cache.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Docker Compose has good quality for this scenario!
Docker is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Scenario #2¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type redis.server is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type cache.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Docker Compose has good quality for this scenario!
Docker is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Scenario #3¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type redis.server is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type cache.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type gcp.memorystore.
Ansible has bad quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Scenario #4¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type redis.server is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type cache.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type kubernetes.cluster.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is more specialized.
Kubernetes has good quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is more specialized.
Component "service.application"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type service.application with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type service.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type docker.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Docker Compose has good quality for this scenario!
Docker is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Scenario #2¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type service.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type docker.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type docker.engine, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Docker Compose has good quality for this scenario!
Docker is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Docker Compose is more specialized.
Scenario #3¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type service.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type docker.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type gcp.cloudrun.
Ansible has bad quality for this scenario!
Custom module with imperative parts, while Terraform provides a declarative module.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Scenario #4¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type service.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type docker.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type kubernetes.cluster.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is more specialized.
Kubernetes has good quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is the underlying technology.
Terraform has cautious quality for this scenario!
Kubernetes is more specialized.
Scenario #5¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type service.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type tar.archive. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. Special integration for systemd.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #6¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type service.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type tar.archive. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. Special integration for systemd.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #7¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type service.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type zip.archive. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. Special integration for systemd.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #8¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type service.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type zip.archive. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. Special integration for systemd.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #9¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type service.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type zip.archive. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type gcp.appengine.
Ansible has bad quality for this scenario!
Custom module with imperative parts, while Terraform provides a declarative module.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Component "software.application"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type software.application with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type software.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type apt.package. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #2¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type software.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type apt.package. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #3¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type software.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type tar.archive. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
While this is a primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible, we must rely on scripts. More specialized types should be used, e.g., service.application.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #4¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type software.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type tar.archive. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
While this is a primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible, we must rely on scripts. More specialized types should be used, e.g., "service.application".
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #5¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type software.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type zip.archive. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type local.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
While this is a primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible, we must rely on scripts. More specialized types should be used, e.g., service.application.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Scenario #6¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type software.application is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type zip.archive. The node template is hosted on an arbitrary hosting stack of arbitrary length, which is hosted on the node template "host 2" of node type remote.machine.
Ansible has good quality for this scenario!
While this is a primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible, we must rely on scripts. More specialized types should be used, e.g., service.application.
Terraform has bad quality for this scenario!
Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort".
Component "virtual.machine"¶
The following scenarios deploy a node template of node type virtual.machine with various hosting stacks, artifacts, deployment technologies, and qualities.
Scenario #1¶
In this scenario, the node template "component" of node type virtual.machine is deployed. This node template is implemented by its deployment artifact "artifact" of artifact type machine.image. The node template is hosted on the node template "host 1" of node type openstack.provider.
Ansible has cautious quality for this scenario!
Terraform is more specialized.
Terraform has good quality for this scenario!
Terraform provides a declarative module.
Appendix A "Cards"¶
This appendix contains the deployment quality cards.
Rule #1¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 1 |
| Identifier | docker.engine::ansible@local.machine |
| Component | docker.engine |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #2¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 2 |
| Identifier | docker.engine::terraform@local.machine |
| Component | docker.engine |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #3¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 3 |
| Identifier | docker.engine::ansible@remote.machine |
| Component | docker.engine |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #4¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 4 |
| Identifier | docker.engine::terraform@remote.machine |
| Component | docker.engine |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #5¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 5 |
| Identifier | gcp.service::ansible |
| Component | gcp.service |
| Technology | ansible |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible provides a declarative module |
| Graph |
Rule #6¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 6 |
| Identifier | gcp.service::terraform |
| Component | gcp.service |
| Technology | terraform |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #7¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 7 |
| Identifier | ingress::ansible@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | ingress |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Kubernetes is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #8¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 8 |
| Identifier | ingress::kubernetes@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | ingress |
| Technology | kubernetes |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Kubernetes is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #9¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 9 |
| Identifier | ingress::terraform@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | ingress |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Kubernetes is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #10¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 10 |
| Identifier | ingress::ansible@local.machine |
| Component | ingress |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #11¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 11 |
| Identifier | ingress::terraform@local.machine |
| Component | ingress |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #12¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 12 |
| Identifier | ingress::ansible@remote.machine |
| Component | ingress |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #13¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 13 |
| Identifier | ingress::terraform@remote.machine |
| Component | ingress |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #14¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 14 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::ansible@mysql.dbms->docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #15¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 15 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::compose@mysql.dbms->docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | One-time use docker container ("fake Kubernetes job") with imperative parts, while other technologies provide declarative modules. |
| Graph |
Rule #16¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 16 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::terraform@mysql.dbms->docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #17¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 17 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::ansible@mysql.dbms->docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #18¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 18 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::compose@mysql.dbms->docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | One-time use docker container ("fake Kubernetes job") with imperative parts, while other technologies provide declarative modules. |
| Graph |
Rule #19¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 19 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::terraform@mysql.dbms->docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0.75 |
| Label | moderate |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. However, Terraform requires an SSH workaround. Ansible is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #20¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 20 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::ansible@mysql.dbms->gcp.cloudsql |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> gcp.cloudsql |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. However, need to install and handle GCP CloudSQL Proxy, while the corresponding Terraform module already provides this. |
| Graph |
Rule #21¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 21 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::terraform@mysql.dbms->gcp.cloudsql |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> gcp.cloudsql |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #22¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 22 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::ansible@mysql.dbms->kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #23¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 23 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::kubernetes@mysql.dbms->kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | kubernetes |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Kubernetes Job with imperative parts, while declarative other technologies provide declarative modules. |
| Graph |
Rule #24¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 24 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::terraform@mysql.dbms->kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.25 |
| Label | poor |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #25¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 25 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::ansible@mysql.dbms->local.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #26¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 26 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::terraform@mysql.dbms->local.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #27¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 27 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::ansible@mysql.dbms->remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #28¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 28 |
| Identifier | mysql.database::terraform@mysql.dbms->remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.database |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | mysql.dbms -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. However, Terraform requires an SSH workaround. Ansible is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #29¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 29 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::ansible@docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized |
| Graph |
Rule #30¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 30 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::compose@docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Docker is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #31¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 31 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::terraform@docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #32¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 32 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::ansible@docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized |
| Graph |
Rule #33¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 33 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::compose@docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Docker is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #34¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 34 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::terraform@docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #35¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 35 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::ansible@gcp.cloudsql |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | gcp.cloudsql |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #36¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 36 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::terraform@gcp.cloudsql |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | gcp.cloudsql |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #37¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 37 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::ansible@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Kubernetes is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #38¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 38 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::kubernetes@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | kubernetes |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Kubernetes is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #39¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 39 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::terraform@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Kubernetes is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #40¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 40 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::ansible@local.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #41¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 41 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::terraform@local.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #42¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 42 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::ansible@remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #43¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 43 |
| Identifier | mysql.dbms#dbms.image::terraform@remote.machine |
| Component | mysql.dbms |
| Artifact | dbms.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #44¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 44 |
| Identifier | object.storage::ansible@gcp.cloudstorage |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | gcp.cloudstorage |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #45¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 45 |
| Identifier | object.storage::terraform@gcp.cloudstorage |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | gcp.cloudstorage |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #46¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 46 |
| Identifier | object.storage::ansible@minio.server->docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | minio.server -> docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #47¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 47 |
| Identifier | object.storage::compose@minio.server->docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | minio.server -> docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | One-time use docker container ("fake Kubernetes job") with imperative parts, while other technologies provide declarative modules. |
| Graph |
Rule #48¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 48 |
| Identifier | object.storage::terraform@minio.server->docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | minio.server -> docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #49¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 49 |
| Identifier | object.storage::ansible@minio.server->docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | minio.server -> docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #50¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 50 |
| Identifier | object.storage::compose@minio.server->docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | minio.server -> docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | One-time use docker container ("fake Kubernetes job") with imperative parts, while other technologies provide declarative modules. |
| Graph |
Rule #51¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 51 |
| Identifier | object.storage::terraform@minio.server->docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | minio.server -> docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0.75 |
| Label | moderate |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. However, Terraform requires an SSH workaround. Ansible is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #52¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 52 |
| Identifier | object.storage::ansible@minio.server->kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | minio.server -> kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #53¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 53 |
| Identifier | object.storage::kubernetes@minio.server->kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | kubernetes |
| Hosting | minio.server -> kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Kubernetes Job with imperative parts, while declarative other technologies provide declarative modules. |
| Graph |
Rule #54¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 54 |
| Identifier | object.storage::terraform@minio.server->kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | object.storage |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | minio.server -> kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.25 |
| Label | poor |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #55¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 55 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::ansible@docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #56¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 56 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::compose@docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Docker is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #57¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 57 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::terraform@docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #58¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 58 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::ansible@docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #59¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 59 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::compose@docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Docker is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #60¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 60 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::terraform@docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #61¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 61 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::ansible@gcp.memorystore |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | gcp.memorystore |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #62¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 62 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::terraform@gcp.memorystore |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | gcp.memorystore |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #63¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 63 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::ansible@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Kubernetes is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #64¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 64 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::kubernetes@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | kubernetes |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Kubernetes is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #65¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 65 |
| Identifier | redis.server#cache.image::terraform@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | redis.server |
| Artifact | cache.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Kubernetes is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #66¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 66 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::ansible@docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #67¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 67 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::compose@docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Docker is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #68¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 68 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::terraform@docker.engine->local.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #69¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 69 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::ansible@docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #70¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 70 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::compose@docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | compose |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Docker is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #71¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 71 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::terraform@docker.engine->remote.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | docker.engine -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Docker Compose is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #72¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 72 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::ansible@gcp.cloudrun |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | gcp.cloudrun |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Custom module with imperative parts, while Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #73¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 73 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::terraform@gcp.cloudrun |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | gcp.cloudrun |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #74¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 74 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::ansible@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Kubernetes is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #75¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 75 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::kubernetes@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | kubernetes |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Kubernetes is the underlying technology. |
| Graph |
Rule #76¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 76 |
| Identifier | service.application#docker.image::terraform@kubernetes.cluster |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | docker.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | kubernetes.cluster |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Kubernetes is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #77¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 77 |
| Identifier | service.application#tar.archive::ansible@*->local.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | tar.archive |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. Special integration for systemd. |
| Graph |
Rule #78¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 78 |
| Identifier | service.application#tar.archive::terraform@*->local.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | tar.archive |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #79¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 79 |
| Identifier | service.application#tar.archive::ansible@*->remote.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | tar.archive |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. Special integration for systemd. |
| Graph |
Rule #80¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 80 |
| Identifier | service.application#tar.archive::terraform@*->remote.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | tar.archive |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #81¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 81 |
| Identifier | service.application#zip.archive::ansible@*->local.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. Special integration for systemd. |
| Graph |
Rule #82¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 82 |
| Identifier | service.application#zip.archive::terraform@*->local.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #83¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 83 |
| Identifier | service.application#zip.archive::ansible@*->remote.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. Special integration for systemd. |
| Graph |
Rule #84¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 84 |
| Identifier | service.application#zip.archive::terraform@*->remote.machine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #85¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 85 |
| Identifier | service.application#zip.archive::ansible@gcp.appengine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | gcp.appengine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Custom module with imperative parts, while Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #86¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 86 |
| Identifier | service.application#zip.archive::terraform@gcp.appengine |
| Component | service.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | gcp.appengine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Rule #87¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 87 |
| Identifier | software.application#apt.package::ansible@*->local.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | apt.package |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #88¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 88 |
| Identifier | software.application#apt.package::terraform@*->local.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | apt.package |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #89¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 89 |
| Identifier | software.application#apt.package::ansible@*->remote.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | apt.package |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible. |
| Graph |
Rule #90¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 90 |
| Identifier | software.application#apt.package::terraform@*->remote.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | apt.package |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #91¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 91 |
| Identifier | software.application#tar.archive::ansible@*->local.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | tar.archive |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | While this is a primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible, we must rely on scripts. More specialized types should be used, e.g., service.application. |
| Graph |
Rule #92¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 92 |
| Identifier | software.application#tar.archive::terraform@*->local.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | tar.archive |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #93¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 93 |
| Identifier | software.application#tar.archive::ansible@*->remote.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | tar.archive |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | While this is a primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible, we must rely on scripts. More specialized types should be used, e.g., "service.application". |
| Graph |
Rule #94¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 94 |
| Identifier | software.application#tar.archive::terraform@*->remote.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | tar.archive |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #95¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 95 |
| Identifier | software.application#zip.archive::ansible@*->local.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | While this is a primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible, we must rely on scripts. More specialized types should be used, e.g., service.application. |
| Graph |
Rule #96¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 96 |
| Identifier | software.application#zip.archive::terraform@*->local.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> local.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #97¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 97 |
| Identifier | software.application#zip.archive::ansible@*->remote.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | While this is a primary use case due to the specialization of Ansible, we must rely on scripts. More specialized types should be used, e.g., service.application. |
| Graph |
Rule #98¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 98 |
| Identifier | software.application#zip.archive::terraform@*->remote.machine |
| Component | software.application |
| Artifact | zip.archive |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | * -> remote.machine |
| Quality | 0 |
| Label | bad |
| Reason | Ansible is more specialized. Also using provisioners is a "last resort". |
| Graph |
Rule #99¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 99 |
| Identifier | virtual.machine#machine.image::ansible@openstack.provider |
| Component | virtual.machine |
| Artifact | machine.image |
| Technology | ansible |
| Hosting | openstack.provider |
| Quality | 0.5 |
| Label | cautious |
| Reason | Terraform is more specialized. |
| Graph |
Rule #100¶
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Number | 100 |
| Identifier | virtual.machine#machine.image::terraform@openstack.provider |
| Component | virtual.machine |
| Artifact | machine.image |
| Technology | terraform |
| Hosting | openstack.provider |
| Quality | 1 |
| Label | good |
| Reason | Terraform provides a declarative module. |
| Graph |
Appendix B "YAML"¶
This appendix contains the deployment qualities as YAML. The rules are also available as download.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 | |
Reference Implementation¶
We provide a reference implementation for this specification as part of OpenTOSCA Vintner. OpenTOSCA Vintner is a TOSCA preprocessing and management layer. The project is open-source, licensed under Apache-2.0, and publicly available at GitHub.
Acknowledgments¶
This specification is developed for the purpose of research by the Institute of Software Engineering (ISTE) and the Institute of Architecture of Application Systems (IAAS) of the University of Stuttgart, Germany. The development is partially funded by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action (BMWK) as part of the Software-Defined Car (SofDCar) project (19S21002).
Correspondence¶
Please address all correspondence concerning this specification to Miles Stötzner <miles.stoetzner@iste.uni-stuttgart.de, https://miles.stoetzner.de>.
Disclaimer of Warranty¶
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.