Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Apache Maven vs Terraform: What are the differences?
Introduction
In the world of DevOps and software development, tools like Apache Maven and Terraform play crucial roles in building and managing projects efficiently. However, they serve different purposes and have unique features that distinguish them from each other.
Packaging and Build Automation: Apache Maven is primarily a build automation tool used for building and managing any Java-based project. It is focused on project object model (POM) file to manage project's build, reporting, and documentation. On the other hand, Terraform is an infrastructure as code tool used for building, changing, and versioning infrastructure safely and efficiently.
Technology Support: Apache Maven is specifically designed for Java projects and provides extensive support for building Java applications. It also supports other programming languages, but its core functionality is tailored for Java. In contrast, Terraform is language-agnostic and can be used to manage infrastructure components across multiple cloud providers, making it versatile for various types of projects.
Dependency Management: Apache Maven excels in dependency management by automatically downloading the necessary dependencies required for the project. It can efficiently manage dependencies, resolve conflicts, and ensure the project builds successfully. Terraform, on the other hand, focuses on managing infrastructure resources and their dependencies in a declarative manner, rather than managing code dependencies.
Execution Environment: The primary focus of Apache Maven is on the build lifecycle and providing a standard way to build and package Java projects. It is executed on the developer's local machine or on a build server to generate the project artifacts. Conversely, Terraform focuses on infrastructure provisioning and is typically used to define, plan, and apply infrastructure changes on cloud providers through its command-line interface or integration with CI/CD pipelines.
State Management: Apache Maven does not have a built-in feature for managing state information about the project. In contrast, Terraform emphasizes state management to keep track of the existing infrastructure configuration and desired state, allowing it to plan and execute changes accurately without causing any disruptions.
Community Ecosystem: Apache Maven has a vast community of developers and extensive repositories of plugins and libraries to enhance its functionality. It benefits from a mature ecosystem that supports various build and automation tasks. On the contrary, Terraform, being a newer tool, has a growing community and ecosystem that is rapidly evolving to meet the demands of modern infrastructure management.
In Summary, Apache Maven and Terraform differ in their focus on packaging and build automation, technology support, dependency management, execution environment, state management, and community ecosystem, catering to distinct needs in the software development and infrastructure provisioning processes.
Ok, so first - AWS Copilot is CloudFormation under the hood, but the way it works results in you not thinking about CFN anymore. AWS found the right balance with Copilot - it's insanely simple to setup production-ready multi-account environment with many services inside, with CI/CD out of the box etc etc. It's pretty new, but even now it was enough to launch Transcripto, which uses may be a dozen of different AWS services, all bound together by Copilot.
Because Pulumi uses real programming languages, you can actually write abstractions for your infrastructure code, which is incredibly empowering. You still 'describe' your desired state, but by having a programming language at your fingers, you can factor out patterns, and package it up for easier consumption.
We use Terraform to manage AWS cloud environment for the project. It is pretty complex, largely static, security-focused, and constantly evolving.
Terraform provides descriptive (declarative) way of defining the target configuration, where it can work out the dependencies between configuration elements and apply differences without re-provisioning the entire cloud stack.
AdvantagesTerraform is vendor-neutral in a way that it is using a common configuration language (HCL) with plugins (providers) for multiple cloud and service providers.
Terraform keeps track of the previous state of the deployment and applies incremental changes, resulting in faster deployment times.
Terraform allows us to share reusable modules between projects. We have built an impressive library of modules internally, which makes it very easy to assemble a new project from pre-fabricated building blocks.
DisadvantagesSoftware is imperfect, and Terraform is no exception. Occasionally we hit annoying bugs that we have to work around. The interaction with any underlying APIs is encapsulated inside 3rd party Terraform providers, and any bug fixes or new features require a provider release. Some providers have very poor coverage of the underlying APIs.
Terraform is not great for managing highly dynamic parts of cloud environments. That part is better delegated to other tools or scripts.
Terraform state may go out of sync with the target environment or with the source configuration, which often results in painful reconciliation.
I personally am not a huge fan of vendor lock in for multiple reasons:
- I've seen cost saving moves to the cloud end up costing a fortune and trapping companies due to over utilization of cloud specific features.
- I've seen S3 failures nearly take down half the internet.
- I've seen companies get stuck in the cloud because they aren't built cloud agnostic.
I choose to use terraform for my cloud provisioning for these reasons:
- It's cloud agnostic so I can use it no matter where I am.
- It isn't difficult to use and uses a relatively easy to read language.
- It tests infrastructure before running it, and enables me to see and keep changes up to date.
- It runs from the same CLI I do most of my CM work from.
Context: I wanted to create an end to end IoT data pipeline simulation in Google Cloud IoT Core and other GCP services. I never touched Terraform meaningfully until working on this project, and it's one of the best explorations in my development career. The documentation and syntax is incredibly human-readable and friendly. I'm used to building infrastructure through the google apis via Python , but I'm so glad past Sung did not make that decision. I was tempted to use Google Cloud Deployment Manager, but the templates were a bit convoluted by first impression. I'm glad past Sung did not make this decision either.
Solution: Leveraging Google Cloud Build Google Cloud Run Google Cloud Bigtable Google BigQuery Google Cloud Storage Google Compute Engine along with some other fun tools, I can deploy over 40 GCP resources using Terraform!
Check Out My Architecture: CLICK ME
Check out the GitHub repo attached
Pros of Apache Maven
- Dependency management138
- Necessary evil70
- I’d rather code my app, not my build60
- Publishing packaged artifacts48
- Convention over configuration43
- Modularisation18
- Consistency across builds11
- Prevents overengineering using scripting6
- Runs Tests4
- Lot of cool plugins4
- Extensible3
- Hard to customize2
- Runs on Linux2
- Runs on OS X1
- Slow incremental build1
- Inconsistent buillds1
- Undeterminisc1
- Good IDE tooling1
Pros of Terraform
- Infrastructure as code121
- Declarative syntax73
- Planning45
- Simple28
- Parallelism24
- Well-documented8
- Cloud agnostic8
- It's like coding your infrastructure in simple English6
- Immutable infrastructure6
- Platform agnostic5
- Extendable4
- Automation4
- Automates infrastructure deployments4
- Portability4
- Lightweight2
- Scales to hundreds of hosts2
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Apache Maven
- Complex6
- Inconsistent buillds1
- Not many plugin-alternatives0
Cons of Terraform
- Doesn't have full support to GKE1