Doc | Add a comparison doc entry for: leverage cli vs terraform vs terragrunt vs terramate

[exequielrafaela]

Improved Feature Request:

Describe the Feature

Add a comprehensive documentation entry to the binbashar/le-ref-architecture-doc repository that compares Terraform, Terragrunt, and Leverage CLI, providing insights into their features, use cases, pros, and cons. This documentation will help users understand the differences between these tools and make informed decisions when choosing one for their infrastructure management needs.

Expected Behavior

The documentation should include:

1. A comparative table providing an overview of each tool (Terraform, Terragrunt, and Leverage CLI) with a comparison of their features and capabilities, including:

   • Code modularity and reusability
   • Configuration management and versioning
   • State management and locking
   • Remote state and module sources
   • Integration with CI/CD pipelines
   • Community support and ecosystem
   • Use cases and scenarios where each tool is best suited
   • Pros and cons of using each tool, with examples from the provided sources

2. The documentation should be comprehensive, easy to follow, and structured in a way that allows users to quickly compare and contrast the tools.

Use Case

This documentation will be valuable for:

• DevOps/Cloud Engineers/Developers who want to use Leverage CLI for their infrastructure as code projects.
• Users who are unsure about which tool to use for their AWS IaC deployment.
• Users who want to learn best practices and recommendations for using Leverage CLI to run Terraform.

Additional Context

Please refer to the following links for similar documentation that compares Terraform, Terragrunt, and other similar tools:

• A Comprehensive Guide to Terraform
• Terraspace vs. Terragrunt
• Terraform vs. Terragrunt vs. Terraspace
• Terramate and Terragrunt

The new documentation should follow the existing structure and format of the binbashar/le-ref-architecture-doc repository.

[exequielrafaela]

Blueprint draft (to be reviewed, completed and improved) of the associated documentation to solve the issue:

Overview

This documentation provides a comprehensive comparison of Terraform, Terragrunt, and Leverage CLI. It aims to help users understand the differences between these tools and make informed decision why we choose Leverage CLI for our infrastructure management needs. The documentation includes a comparative table providing an overview of each tool with a comparison of their features and capabilities. Additionally, it covers the use cases and scenarios where each tool is best suited, along with the pros and cons of using each tool.

Comparative Table

The following table provides an overview of Terraform, Terragrunt, and Leverage CLI with a comparison of their features and capabilities:

Feature	Terraform	Terragrunt	Leverage CLI
Code modularity and reusability	Yes	Yes	Yes
Configuration management and versioning	Yes	Yes	Yes
State management and locking	Yes	Yes	Yes
Remote state and module sources	Yes	Yes	Yes
Integration with CI/CD pipelines	Yes	Yes	Yes
Community support and ecosystem	Large community and ecosystem	Growing community and ecosystem	Growing community and ecosystem
Use cases and scenarios where each tool is best suited	Infrastructure provisioning and management	Managing Terraform code and environments	Simplifying Terraform workflows and managing infrastructure *If used together with the Leverage Ref Arch you get: Managing Terraform code and environments
Pros	- Easy to use and learn - Large community and ecosystem - Supports various cloud platforms - Comprehensive documentation - Good for large-scale infrastructure - Modular and reusable code - Supports advanced deployment workflows	- Enables code reuse and sharing - Simplifies Terraform workflows - Supports advanced deployment workflows - Good for managing multiple environments - Modular and reusable code	- Simplifies Terraform workflows - Easy to use and learn - Provides features for managing infrastructure - Modular and reusable code - Supports advanced deployment workflows

Features and Capabilities

Code Modularity and Reusability

All three tools support code modularity and reusability. Terraform allows for the creation of reusable modules that can be used across multiple projects, while Terragrunt provides support for shared modules and configurations that can be reused across environments. Leverage CLI uses a modular approach through the Reference Architecture for AWS and the IaC Library to simplify Terraform workflows and enables the reuse of modules across projects.

Configuration Management and Versioning

All three tools support configuration management and versioning. Terraform provides support for version control systems like Git and enables configuration management using HCL (HashiCorp Configuration Language). Terragrunt allows for the management of Terraform code and configurations across multiple environments using Git or other version control systems. Leverage CLI provides similar features for managing Terraform code and configurations when used together with the Reference Architecture for AWS.

State Management and Locking

All three tools support state management and locking. Terraform provides support for state management using a state file that tracks the current state of the infrastructure. Terragrunt provides a wrapper around Terraform state management and provides support for remote state locking. Leverage CLI provides also a wrapper around Terraform for simplified approach to Terraform state management that includes remote state management and locking, more info could be found in the official Leverage doc.

Remote State and Module Sources

All three tools support remote state and module sources. Terraform provides support for remote state and module sources, enabling the storage of state and modules in remote locations. Terragrunt supports remote state management and allows users to reference modules from remote repositories like Git or Terraform Registry. Leverage CLI also supports remote state and module sources, allowing users to reference modules from remote repositories like Git or Terraform Registry and store state in remote location AWS S3, more info could be found in the official Leverage doc.

Integration with CI/CD Pipelines

All three tools support integration with CI/CD pipelines. Terraform supports integration with popular CI/CD tools like Jenkins, Travis CI, and CircleCI. Terragrunt provides a hook system to enable running custom scripts during different stages of the deployment process, which can be used to integrate with various CI/CD pipelines. Leverage CLI integrates with CI/CD pipelines and can be triggered from a command line, allowing users to automate their infrastructure deployment workflows.

Community Support and Ecosystem

All three tools have active communities and ecosystems. Terraform has a large community and ecosystem, with many third-party modules and plugins available to extend its functionality. Terragrunt has a smaller community than Terraform, but it has an active developer community and a growing ecosystem of third-party modules and plugins. Leverage CLI has a smaller community than Terraform but is gaining popularity in the DevOps and AWS Cloud community.

Use Cases and Scenarios

Terraform, Terragrunt, and Leverage CLI are all best suited for different use cases and scenarios.

• Terraform is well suited for infrastructure deployment, provisioning, and management for any cloud provider.
• Terragrunt is best suited for managing complex, multi-environment infrastructure stacks with code reuse and automation.
• Leverage CLI is best suited for DevOps teams looking to automate their infrastructure deployment workflows and reduce the time and effort spent on infrastructure management tasks. And since it's used in the context of the Leverage Reference Architecture for AWS you'll get managing complex, multi-environment Terraform infrastructure stacks with code reuse and automation on AWS.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Terraform, Terragrunt, and Leverage CLI are all powerful tools for infrastructure as code management. The choice of tool depends on the specific needs and requirements of each project. By providing a comprehensive comparison of these tools, the documentation will help users understand the differences between these tools and make informed decisions when choosing one for their infrastructure management needs.

[exequielrafaela]

@diego-ojeda-binbash OJ looking forward to your feedback when you have time. Thanks in advance for your help 🙏🏼

[diego-ojeda-binbash]

@exequielrafaela In order to make the comparison fair, I think you need to either:

1. Compare the Leverage CLI as a stand-alone tool (which is where it doesn't shine much),
2. Or just use the Leverage CLI + Reference Architecture as the duet being compared, hence clearly establishing that you will be comparing both against Terraform and Terragrunt. So no halfsies.

If you go for 2, then you could also add "Cons" as an entry to the table and probably mention there things like how the conventions introduced by the Reference Architecture, and honored by the Leverage CLI, make your life easier by establishing an opinionated way of doing things. Below there's a comparison between "convention" and "configuration" that might help you with that.

Convention	Configuration
Implicit rules and assumptions followed by default	Explicit settings and parameters defined to customize behavior
Often used to enforce consistency and reduce complexity	Allows for greater flexibility and customization
Examples include naming conventions, folder structures, and coding standards	Examples include system settings, environment variables, and application configurations
May be language or framework-specific, or established by organizational standards	May differ between environments or deployment scenarios
Requires minimal effort to adopt or apply	Requires explicit understanding and modification by a user or administrator
May be overridden or customized in some cases	Typically requires manual intervention or specialized tools for changes or updates
May be more difficult to diagnose or debug when issues arise	May offer more transparency and control over behavior and performance
Often used in conjunction with automation tools or frameworks	May be more prone to errors or misconfigurations

[exequielrafaela]

@diego-ojeda-binbash thanks for your valuable feedback. Also leaving a link to our private slack thread as reference: https://binbashar.slack.com/archives/GG0PJ78J3/p1683724533899489