Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ship Constructs compatible with vanilla aws-cdk-lib/aws-eks #161

Closed
sam-goodwin opened this issue May 15, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Ship Constructs compatible with vanilla aws-cdk-lib/aws-eks #161

sam-goodwin opened this issue May 15, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@sam-goodwin
Copy link

Is it possible to use these configurations as Construct libraries? I find the workflow of cloning this repo and running make to be at odds with how the rest of the AWS CDK ecosystem works. I have an existing EKS cluster deployed with the AWS CDK. I would expect a simple Construct I can instantiate and pass a reference to my aws-eks.Cluster, but this library seems to require I am using eks-blueprints (which has the same problem of diverging from standard AWS CDK practices).

new ObservabilityAccelerator(this, "Observability", {
  cluster: myCluster,
  // customize with props
});
@elamaran11
Copy link
Contributor

EKS Blueprints and CDK Accelerator for EKS are opinionated and purpose built solutions for setting up EKS clusters with Day 2 ops toolings. [ObservabilityBuilder](https://github.com/aws-quickstart/cdk-eks-blueprints/blob/main/lib/builders/observability-builder.ts) is not a construct library but an extension of BlueprintsBuilder.
@shapirov103 Anything to add here?

@shapirov103
Copy link
Contributor

Sam and I already discussed it on the blueprints side. I view the request as valid, e.g. reusing existing stacks with some components of the blueprints. I believe outside of the stylistic preferences and opinions on what is idiomatic in node/TS, the main obstacle was that the EKSBlueprint produced a stack rather than a construct. we don't have anything on the roadmap atm, but if there was a confirmed customer demand, we can make it happen.

@elamaran11
Copy link
Contributor

I understand your disappointment but We wont support the requested feature anytime in future. We will keep you posted with this issue if things change.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants