I'm getting started with Kubernetes and I've been diving into different tools for deployments, particularly with Helm charts and Helmsman. Recently, I discovered that Kluctl has some enticing features for templating and supports GitOps quite well. However, the IDP team has mentioned they're leaning towards using ArgoCD for their deployment processes, which follows a different structure and templating approach than what Kluctl offers. I really enjoy the format and CLI of Kluctl, but it seems like that might not align with the IDP team's plans. Would it be a valid approach to use Kluctl just for generating the manifests while allowing the IDP to use ArgoCD (or another tool of their choice) for handling the rendered manifests?
2 Answers
Have you guys talked to the IDP team about what you're specifically trying to achieve? Sometimes when you present a tool you want to use without discussing the actual problems, it can lead to misunderstandings. Focusing on the needs can help clarify things and might get you a more favorable response.
I think you're looking to have Kluctl generate templates that you can then version control through GitOps, right? Basically, ArgoCD would pull from the git repo where the rendered templates are stored? Just a heads up, it's ArgoCD that would call Kluctl, not the other way around. You'd want to set up your workflow to pull the necessary variables to generate those templates properly.
Yes, that's exactly what I hope to do! But I’m wondering if this setup is actually a good practice or if there's a better way.
Yeah, we’ve had some discussions. But they mentioned things like, 'we've already decided to use X,' which makes it tough for me to propose other options without a solid backup.