Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update media service v4.0 clean up #27195

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Sep 2, 2024
Merged

Conversation

magodo
Copy link
Collaborator

@magodo magodo commented Aug 26, 2024

Community Note

  • Please vote on this PR by adding a 👍 reaction to the original PR to help the community and maintainers prioritize for review
  • Please do not leave comments along the lines of "+1", "me too" or "any updates", they generate extra noise for PR followers and do not help prioritize for review

Description

#27096 has cleaned up the documents for the 4.0 breaking changes. In particular, it removes the deprecated resources' documents. While the media service is missed to do so.

Additionally, this PR enclose the AccountFilterResource to make it removed in v4.0.

PR Checklist

  • I have followed the guidelines in our Contributing Documentation.
  • I have checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change.
  • I have checked if my changes close any open issues. If so please include appropriate closing keywords below.
  • I have updated/added Documentation as required written in a helpful and kind way to assist users that may be unfamiliar with the resource / data source.
  • I have used a meaningful PR title to help maintainers and other users understand this change and help prevent duplicate work.
    For example: “resource_name_here - description of change e.g. adding property new_property_name_here

Changes to existing Resource / Data Source

  • I have added an explanation of what my changes do and why I'd like you to include them (This may be covered by linking to an issue above, but may benefit from additional explanation).
  • I have written new tests for my resource or datasource changes & updated any relevent documentation.
  • I have successfully run tests with my changes locally. If not, please provide details on testing challenges that prevented you running the tests.
  • (For changes that include a state migration only). I have manually tested the migration path between relevant versions of the provider.

Testing

  • My submission includes Test coverage as described in the Contribution Guide and the tests pass. (if this is not possible for any reason, please include details of why you did or could not add test coverage)

Change Log

Below please provide what should go into the changelog (if anything) conforming to the Changelog Format documented here.

  • azurerm_resource - support for the thing1 property [GH-00000]

This is a (please select all that apply):

  • Bug Fix
  • New Feature (ie adding a service, resource, or data source)
  • Enhancement
  • Breaking Change

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #0000

Note

If this PR changes meaningfully during the course of review please update the title and description as required.

Copy link
Member

@catriona-m catriona-m left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @magodo - I just left one comment about the use of the FourPointOh flag, but otherwise this is looking good. Thanks!

@@ -67,7 +67,10 @@ func (r Registration) DataSources() []sdk.DataSource {
}

func (r Registration) Resources() []sdk.Resource {
return []sdk.Resource{
AccountFilterResource{},
if !features.FourPointOhBeta() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

now that 4.0 has been released we can remove this completely without using the flag

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've checked some other resources and noticed they were still behind the flag (e.g. iottimeseriesinsights). I'd like to follow the current behavior, and expect a commit later to do a bulk delete. WDYT?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We shouldn't add 4.0 flags in now that 4.0 has been released. In this case we should probably leave this as it was given that the deprecated resource hasn't bene removed or add the 5.0 flag

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Then do you want me to delete the same if check for the SupportedResources()? I'm afraid if all of them are deleted, then when the person who is gonna clean up those resources by inspecting the 4.0 flag will miss those resources.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the other if statement should be fine to remain because it was put in place before the 4.0 release

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

return []sdk.Resource{
AccountFilterResource{},
}
return []sdk.Resource{}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

sorry for the confusion @magodo , I think we need to leave this as it is for now and not remove it, since it wasn't feature flagged before 4.0 was released

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@catriona-m Oh.. I see. That makes sense now. I've reverted it back.

Copy link
Member

@catriona-m catriona-m left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Apologies for not noticing this on the previous review, but could you rebase this on main and run make again? The issue labeller script has been updated to not include labels without regexes in labeler-issue-triage.yml since this pr was opened. Thanks!

@magodo
Copy link
Collaborator Author

magodo commented Sep 2, 2024

@catriona-m Sure, I've reverted the labeler yaml back now.

Copy link
Member

@catriona-m catriona-m left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @magodo LGTM!

@catriona-m catriona-m merged commit b6e36fb into hashicorp:main Sep 2, 2024
7 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v4.1.0 milestone Sep 2, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2024

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 3, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants