Hello, I’m trying to understand the correct way to use workdir and source provisioning with the Terraform plan GitHub Action.

I’m currently using
cloudposse/github-action-atmos-terraform-plan with my components which use workdir + source provisioning enabled, because I want to avoid cache collisions when running multiple stacks in parallel that share the same component.

The issue I’m encountering is that the action attempts to write the Terraform plan file to:
terraform/components/<component>/

However, when workdir is enabled, Atmos provisions the component to:
.workdir/<stack>-<component>/
This causes a mismatch between where the action expects the component to exist and where Atmos actually provisions it.

For context: My component base path is terraform/components
My current workaround is to pre-create the expected component folder in the pipeline, while still running Terraform from the component workdir.

Before continuing with this approach, I wanted to ask: Is there a recommended way to use workdir + source provisioning with the plan action? Or is there a configuration option I might be missing so the action uses the Atmos workdir path instead?

question, I am doing POC for GitHub Actions | atmos and trying to understand how to get up and running quickly without having the requirements noted (e.g. s3 bucket, dynamoDB table)

It appears that components.terraform.base_path (in atmos.yaml) doesn't support a nested directory structure - can someone confirm? I would like to organize components, at the very least, by cloud provider: /components/terraform/aws/..., but I can't get this to work.

Is there a way to get a component DAG view of all components for a stack? I'm aware of atmos describe dependents, but I'm looking for a command that operates at the stack level.

Hi! Looking forward to use the new ai integration! I love how Atmos is evolving 🙂

Did anyone already succeed in using litellm as an AI backend?

How do you pin providers across all components ?

We ran into an issue today due to the newest https://github.com/cloudposse/terraform-provider-utils/releases/tag/v1.32.0 provider and need to pin across all of our components to v1.31.0

Do we have a way of doing terraform state migrations per component-stack slug yet ?

Ideally, we’d like to do this in a migrations.tf style hcl but do it per component-stack so migrations-redis-banana-ue1-dev.tf won’t be applied to redis-banana-ue2-prod

hello, wondering what happens if you're using !terraform.state and the component/stack you're querying for doesn't exist yet, or hasn't been applied yet?

Is the atmos website broken for anyone https://atmos.tools/ ?

Edit: works fine now ✅️ 😄

Re: upgrading from atmos 1.168.0 to latest version, the ignore_missing_template_values (link) seems to be the method @Pablo Paez found. Is there anyway to set this at a more global level than on every imported catalog ?

e.g.

import:
  - path: "<path_to_atmos_manifest2>"
    context: {}
    skip_templates_processing: false
    ignore_missing_template_values: true

Does atmos pro allow applying each commit like in spacelift ? or does atmos pro only allow for applying on the default branch ?

Hi team, we have some stacks that we want to rename. They have a typo in them while other non-terraform code has the correct spelling and we want to fix it.

The problem is: doing so seems to cause atmos to treat them as a different stack, and tries to create them fresh. We would like to avoid adding import blocks for this but we also don't have direct access to manually move the state files and so we need atmos to do it via our CI pipeline if possible because the stack name is used across multiple environments including production. Is there any way currently?
I see this page talks about renaming components, but what about renaming stacks?

hi there, when taking a layered approach to stacks, how does atmos recommend dealing with the layer x must exist before planning layer y, is it atmos workflows, or should github workflows determine the affected layers, or a combo of both? If there are any examples, it would be a huge help.

hey all, any idea how vendoring should be part of the pipeline? What's your vision on it?

any insight to when chore(deps): update terraform cloudposse/repository/github to v1.1.0 by renovate[bot] · Pull Request #29 · cloudposse-terraform-components/aws-github-repository will be released?

👋 Hey all! We're evaluating Atmos (alongside some other tools/frameworks) for a pretty complex existing Terraform setup. We manage many deployments across cloud providers, accounts, regions, and tenancy models (multi/single-tenant). Each has a "type" with its own blueprint of Terraform code + a tfvars file per deployment. Works fine today, but only for monostates - so we are looking for something more flexible.

We'd like a pattern like this:
- A top-level stack per deployment (e.g. mt-prod-us, lt-prod-us-customer1)
- Each top-level stack only needs two things: 1) an import for its deployment type, and 2) deployment-specific vars
- Blueprints are composable - a blueprint imports layers, layers import components

Example top-level stack:

yaml
# stacks/mt/prod-us.yml
name: mt-prod-us

import:
  - catalog/blueprints/mt

vars:
  stage: prod
  region: us-east-1
  cidr_block: "1.1.1.0/24"
  rds_instance_type: "db.r5.12xlarge"

Blueprint stack:

yaml
# catalog/blueprints/mt.yml
import:
  - catalog/layers/aws/networking
  - catalog/layers/aws/compute
  - catalog/layers/aws/storage

Each Layer would import some number of Components, such as vpc, subnets, etc. for the networking layer.

This looks similar to the Layered Stack Configuration pattern in the docs. My main question is around var precedence: how do I set a default (e.g. cidr_block: 192.168.0.0/24) in a blueprint/layer/component, but allow a top-level stack to override it?

Two options I see:
1. Drop the blueprint layer and list all layer imports directly in each top-level stack - but this risks drift between deployments over time, so probably a no-go for us
2. Use overrides.vars in the top-level stack instead of vars - seems to work in testing, but not sure if this is an anti-pattern

Is option 2 the right approach here, or is there a better pattern for this? Thanks! 🙏

Anyone else seeing this warning?

│ Warning: Incomplete lock file information for providers
│ 
│ Due to your customized provider installation methods, Terraform was forced
│ to calculate lock file checksums locally for the following providers:
│   - hashicorp/aws
│   - hashicorp/tls
│ 
│ The current .terraform.lock.hcl file only includes checksums for
│ linux_amd64, so Terraform running on another platform will fail to install
│ these providers.
│ 
│ To calculate additional checksums for another platform, run:
│   terraform providers lock -platform=linux_amd64
│ (where linux_amd64 is the platform to generate)

Any chance it's related to this warning?

│ Warning: Version constraints inside provider configuration blocks are deprecated
│ 
│   on providers_override.tf.json line 16, in provider.aws:
│   16:       "version": "5.100.0"
│ 
│ Terraform 0.13 and earlier allowed provider version constraints inside the
│ provider configuration block, but that is now deprecated and will be
│ removed in a future version of Terraform. To silence this warning, move the
│ provider version constraint into the required_providers block.

It seems to be specific to vendored components

What's a good way in the stack yaml to reference the aws account id in an arn without hard coding it? Our devs created a new hardcoded input called var.aws_account_id in the stage mixin but there must be a better way

Is there anyway to cache the deep merged stack yaml to save time when running subsequent commands like plan/apply? Hoping to run something like atmos describe components > deepmerge.yaml and the run atmos plan xyz -s ue1-dev --cached-deepmerge-yaml deepmerge.yaml or similar to save time

hey all! I see the following in the documentation.

https://atmos.tools/design-patterns/version-management/vendoring-components#advanced-vendor-configuration

specifically:

  sources:
    # Vendor multiple versions of the same component
    - component: vpc
      source: "<http://github.com/cloudposse/terraform-aws-vpc.git///?ref={{.Version}}|github.com/cloudposse/terraform-aws-vpc.git///?ref={{.Version}}>"
      targets:
        - path: "vpc/{{.Version}}"
          version: "2.1.0"
        - path: "vpc/latest"
          version: "2.2.0"

Is this still supported?

 Error: yaml: unmarshal errors:
 line 27: cannot unmarshal !!map into string
 line 29: cannot unmarshal !!map into string
 line 31: cannot unmarshal !!map into string

Is there guidance for using !terraform.state vs atmos.Component ? I’m struggling to understand the differences based on the documentation.

This week, we uncovered that atmos.Component was breaking one of our stacks (it was causing terraform workspace to flap during plans which ultimately caused the apply step in Spacelift to fail).

When we changed the offending catalog files to use !terraform.state syntax instead, things began working again.

Given component_A and component_B, the spacelift stacks for component_B were failing when:
• catalog/component_A/defaults.yaml -> had atmos.Component templating to fetch outputs from component_B
• component_B -> uses remote-state module to query outputs from component_A
This seems to be not an issue after we switched to !terraform.state syntax..

We're looking for feedback on our new agent skills. @Andriy Knysh (Cloud Posse) put these together.

https://atmos.tools/changelog/ai-agent-skills

❓️ Wanted to also confirm, that JIT is still not smart enough overwrite its own workdir if the source.version has not changed

❓️ I have atmos creating two different workdirs for the same component using JIT 🧵

lol, sorry...fat fingered