Add most Premium features for gitlab_branch_protection

[sirlatrom]

Fixes #165.

---

TO DO:

• Working EE acceptance tests
• Updated docs

[sirlatrom]

@armsnyder This is probably not yet fully working, but I hit a snag on the acceptance tests in gitlab/resource_gitlab_branch_protection_test.go where e.g. TestAccGitlabBranchProtection_createWithCodeOwnerApproval gives me a 403 when creating the gitlab_branch_protection. When trying to create a protected branch through the UI, it doesn't work until the project has files in the repository, which is currently not possible to do with the provider except if specifying a template project.

[sirlatrom]

TestAccGitlabBranchProtection_createWithCodeOwnerApproval gives me a 403 when creating the gitlab_branch_protection

This turned out to be that I'm not allowed to set the unprotect_access_levels or allowed_to_unprotect fields through the API. I will omit those fields in the resource for now, then.

[sirlatrom]

@armsnyder I've resolved all acceptance test issues now.

Please note that while the response structure contains lists of access levels, allowed users and groups in one long list per action (push, merge), the create options are not made this way, and one has to filter through the lists to find what one is looking for. Hence the proposed argument structure, including the use of TypeSet instead of TypeList, as the input order is not guaranteed to be reflected in the response when reading.

[gabrielrinaldi]

Any plans on merging this? This would be great to allow a bot to push code while restricting everyone else.

[mattkasa]

@sirlatrom this looks great! thank you for implementing this!

Apologies for it taking so long to get reviewed 🙇

Your code and tests look great to me, and I agree with you about using TypeSet for allowed_to_push and allowed_to_merge. Especially since that leaves us room to add access_level inside those in future as well to match the API 👍

I've been able to build and run your branch locally, and test it against a Premium licensed GitLab instance, but I am seeing this when running acceptance tests against that Premium instance, so I was wondering if you had any thoughts related to the code_owners_approval_required licensed feature check? I did verify it's enabled and available on my test instance and wondering if we might also see this failure if we merge and it runs the EE acceptance tests.

=== RUN   TestAccGitlabBranchProtection_basic
    testing.go:677: Step 4, expected error:
        
        Check failed: Check 3/3 error: got code_owner_approval_required true; want false
        
        To match:
        
        feature unavailable: code owner approvals
        
        
--- FAIL: TestAccGitlabBranchProtection_basic (45.56s)
=== RUN   TestAccGitlabBranchProtection_createWithCodeOwnerApproval
    testing.go:665: Step 2, no error received, but expected a match to:
        
        feature unavailable: code owner approvals
        
        
--- FAIL: TestAccGitlabBranchProtection_createWithCodeOwnerApproval (32.51s)
=== RUN   TestAccGitlabBranchProtection_createWithMultipleAccessLevels
--- PASS: TestAccGitlabBranchProtection_createWithMultipleAccessLevels (1.53s)
FAIL
FAIL	github.com/gitlabhq/terraform-provider-gitlab/gitlab	80.738s
FAIL
make: *** [testacc] Error 1

[mattkasa]

Ah, looks like I'm getting that on master currently as well, so it's nothing to do with your changes, in that case I'll go ahead and merge this and we can move forward from there 👍