Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Remove ACR Webhooks; Do not manage container settings via Terraform #324
Remove ACR Webhooks; Do not manage container settings via Terraform #324
Changes from 1 commit
7fcaf95
addda02
38d9071
539288f
0d2554c
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a changelog available for this? I'm wondering if we need to be on the lookout for any new breaks related to a provider rev.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point. If the upstream is following SemVer, that change should t be breaking (or else the major number would have been incremented).
But, I don’t that they’re using SemVer. I can help check tomorrow, @KeithJRome
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-azurerm/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md#1340-september-18-2019
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I upgraded specifically because of a bug related to the provider code that was fixed -- hashicorp/terraform-provider-azurerm#4184.
This was causing issues when trying to run apply multiple times on my test environment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Note that this bumps the Terraform dependency to 12.8 also (hashicorp/terraform-provider-azurerm#4341)
These changes rolled up into 1.34 look like they are good for us on balance, but I see several behavioral changes that we probably need to be aware of like how certain errors are being reported and some workarounds we have in place now may no longer be needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you elaborate on that @KeithJRome ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@KeithJRome I read that thread as they are bumping the dependency to 0.12.8. Do you think that means anyone with the 1.34 provider needs to be running on 0.12.8? or is that only for the provider team? @nmiodice did you upgrade TF to 0.12.8? I didn't see that in the commits...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I looked more closely into each of the changes since 1.32 and the one I was most interested in happens to be the same PR that fixes what you need. The others are very unlikely to cause us problems now that I've dug deeper into the actual code changes involved.
So I don't think this should cause us any problems. Carry On :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes @iphilpot, I think that means we need to rev our direct dependency on Terraform to 0.12.8, but I don't think this will cause us any problems. A few weird error messages might become less weird, and that's probably the extent of impact for us (aside from the bug that @nmiodice referred to being fixed).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@KeithJRome @iphilpot I don't think that we should be driving the version of Terraform based off of the version of the library that the providers consume as its not currently possible to satisfy each provider.
Null Resource Provider: https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-null/blob/b8568b9b73a19322eaf0c44982f3834ff34854ff/go.mod#L5
Azure AD Resource Provider: https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-azuread/blob/0ed698531d3dd13fed4e51469fda2d517f98aa9d/go.mod#L10