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

Add new resource & data source: azurerm_netapp_snapshot #5215

Merged

Conversation

neil-yechenwei
Copy link
Contributor

@neil-yechenwei neil-yechenwei commented Dec 19, 2019

This PR is the code implement of the issue #5216

Copy link
Collaborator

@katbyte katbyte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi @neil-yechenwei,

Thank you for the PR, i've left some mostly minor comments inline to address. I also do wonder if we should eport the filesystem id? is it useful to the user?

azurerm/resource_arm_netapp_snapshot.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/data_source_netapp_snapshot_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_netapp_snapshot_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_netapp_snapshot_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 59 to 62
{
Config: testAccAzureRMNetAppSnapshot_requiresImport(ri, testLocation()),
ExpectError: testRequiresImportError("azurerm_netapp_snapshot"),
},
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

and this can become - data.RequiresImportErrorStep(testAccAzureRMNetAppSnapshot_requiresImport),

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

fixed


* `location` - The Azure Region where the NetApp Snapshot exists.

* `file_system_id` - UUID v4 used to identify the FileSystem.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does it make sense to export this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's not useful to user since this field is also not required for creating this resource on azure portal.

@@ -51,3 +51,5 @@ The following attributes are exported:
* `subnet_id` - The ID of a Subnet in which the NetApp Volume resides.

* `storage_quota_in_gb` - The maximum Storage Quota in Gigabytes allowed for a file system.

* `file_system_id` - The ID of the file system.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does it make sense to export this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same as above reason


* `location` - (Required) Specifies the supported Azure location where the resource exists. Changing this forces a new resource to be created.

* `file_system_id` - (Optional) UUID v4 used to identify the FileSystem.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is exported not an argument? also does it make sense?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same as above reason

@ghost ghost added the dependencies label Dec 24, 2019
@ghost ghost added size/XL and removed size/XXL labels Dec 24, 2019
@neil-yechenwei
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @katbyte , Thanks for your comments. I've updated code per your comments.

@ghost ghost removed the waiting-response label Dec 24, 2019
Copy link
Collaborator

@katbyte katbyte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the revisions @neil-yechenwei, this LGTM now 👍

@katbyte katbyte modified the milestones: v1.41.0, v1.40.0 Dec 26, 2019
@katbyte katbyte merged commit 3fc68cf into hashicorp:master Dec 26, 2019
katbyte added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 26, 2019
jackbatzner pushed a commit to jackbatzner/terraform-provider-azurerm that referenced this pull request Dec 31, 2019
jackbatzner pushed a commit to jackbatzner/terraform-provider-azurerm that referenced this pull request Dec 31, 2019
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jan 8, 2020

This has been released in version 1.40.0 of the provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading. As an example:

provider "azurerm" {
    version = "~> 1.40.0"
}
# ... other configuration ...

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 28, 2020

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. If you feel I made an error 🤖 🙉 , please reach out to my human friends 👉 hashibot-feedback@hashicorp.com. Thanks!

@hashicorp hashicorp locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 28, 2020
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.

None yet

2 participants