[auto/python] Support for remote operations

[justinvp]

This change adds preview support for remote operations in Python's Automation API.

Here's an example of using it:

import sys
import os

import pulumi.automation as auto


args = sys.argv[1:]
destroy = args and args[0] == "destroy"

org = "justinvp"
project_name = "aws-ts-s3-folder"
stack_name = auto.fully_qualified_stack_name(org, project_name, "devpy")

stack = auto.create_or_select_remote_stack_git_source(
    stack_name=stack_name,
    url="https://github.com/pulumi/examples.git",
    branch="refs/heads/master",
    project_path=project_name,
    opts=auto.RemoteWorkspaceOptions(
        env_vars={
            "AWS_REGION":            "us-west-2",
            "AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID":     os.environ["AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID"],
            "AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY": auto.Secret(os.environ["AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY"]),
            "AWS_SESSION_TOKEN":     auto.Secret(os.environ["AWS_SESSION_TOKEN"]),
        },
    ),
)

if destroy:
    stack.destroy(on_output=print)
    print("Stack successfully destroyed")
    sys.exit()

up_res = stack.up(on_output=print)
print(f"Update succeeded!")
print(f"url: {up_res.outputs['websiteUrl'].value}")

I will add sanity tests subsequently.

[pulumi-bot]

Changelog

[uncommitted] (2022-10-28)

Features

• [auto/python] Support for remote operations
  #11174

[kpitzen]

I know this isn't part of the PR, but should we really have asserts in production code?

[iwahbe]

As long as we are asserting on our own logic (not user input), I think its fine. A Exception is better than misunderstanding what is going on and potentially doing the wrong thing.

[justinvp]

bors merge

[bors]

Build succeeded:

• bors-ok