-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 112
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
Deprecations, Removals, and changes for 2.0.0 #49
Conversation
Type: schema.TypeBool, | ||
Required: true, | ||
Deprecated: "The consul_agent_self resource will be deprecated and removed in a future version. More information: https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-consul/issues/46", | ||
}, |
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.
We have precedent for deprecating resource types from back when some of them were reworked as data sources, implemented via a transform function.
It could be reasonable to add another similar function that allows attaching a more free-form deprecation message via the same hook. The message added here, if non-empty, is returned as a warning during the validation step.
Your approach here is an interesting workaround, but it'll cause users to need to upgrade their configs to add this additional attribute, making this more of an "opt in to legacy behavior" flag. Certainly better than just removing it outright, of course!
Type: schema.TypeBool, | ||
Required: true, | ||
Deprecated: "The consul_agent_self resource will be deprecated and removed in a future version. More information: https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-consul/issues/46", | ||
}, |
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'm curious about this resource deprecation strategy. Essentially, it's going to force all users to add a deprecated key to their configs, which is technically a backwards incompatible change itself, isn't it?
But I notice the resource has no other user-supplied fields on it, which makes it hard to mark as deprecated otherwise.
Is this solution the result of a previous discussion, or is a discussion about alternatives worthwhile?
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.
Essentially, it's going to force all users to add a deprecated key to their configs, which is technically a backwards incompatible change itself, isn't it?
Yes, exactly. This is a solution based on a previous discussion about how there is no good solution. I'm super open to fixing it, but it sounds like we'd need an upstream change to support it that isn't near-term.
@@ -9,6 +9,8 @@ import ( | |||
) | |||
|
|||
func TestAccDataConsulAgentSelf_basic(t *testing.T) { | |||
t.Skip("consul_agent_self is incompatible with Consul versions >= 1.0. It has been deprecated and will be removed in an upcoming version.") |
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.
Generally we continue to test things that are deprecated until they're actually removed, I believe, because we have a responsibility to make sure even deprecated things continue to work.
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 agree -- unfortunately the upstream API no longer supports this so the tests fail outright. Should I just leave them failing?
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.
That's fine by me, just felt better to call Skip()
like this.
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.
Perhaps we could make this opt-in with an environment variable, so we can still run tests against older versions of Consul if we want to?
In practice we're unlikely to actually bother to do this in any sort of automatic way, so I'd honestly be fine with leaving this t.Skip
hardcoded under the expectation that we'll manually remove it temporarily for testing if we end up needing to do some further dev work for this against older versions of Consul. (which seems unlikely in itself)
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 mean, the ideal here would be to run tests against the last version of Consul to support this and the latest version of Consul, and use an environment variable to switch whether this was skipped or not.
But also, I don't think it's pressing enough to have a full test matrix built up before we review this PR, so I'm fine with skipping the tests that don't and can't pass, with the understanding that we'll be removing that functionality ASAP.
"github.com/hashicorp/terraform/helper/resource" | ||
) | ||
|
||
func TestAccDataConsulCatalogNodes_basic(t *testing.T) { |
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 it worth taking this opportunity to drop the Catalog
from the test name, as well?
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 -- this was me being lazy but I think now's the time. Will address.
"github.com/hashicorp/terraform/helper/resource" | ||
) | ||
|
||
func TestAccDataConsulCatalogService_basic(t *testing.T) { |
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 it worth taking this opportunity to drop the Catalog from the test name as well?
"github.com/hashicorp/terraform/helper/resource" | ||
) | ||
|
||
func TestAccDataConsulCatalogServices_basic(t *testing.T) { |
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 it worth taking this opportunity to drop the Catalog from the test name, too?
} | ||
|
||
// Clear the ID | ||
d.SetId("") | ||
return nil | ||
} | ||
|
||
func retrieveService(client *consulapi.Client, name string, ident string, node string, dc string) (*consulapi.CatalogService, error) { |
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 don't see where node
is used in this function. Am I missing something?
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.
Awesome catch. That was pretty vital due to the Consul data model, I hadn't actually done the appropriate check for matching a service. Also highlighted a gap in my tests.
testAccCheckConsulServiceValue("consul_service.app", "tags.0", "tag0"), | ||
testAccCheckConsulServiceValue("consul_service.app", "tags.1", "tag1"), | ||
resource.TestCheckResourceAttr("consul_service.google", "id", "google"), | ||
resource.TestCheckResourceAttr("consul_service.google", "address", "www.google.com"), |
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 don't know how we feel about using google.com
in our tests, but just calling out that hashicorptest.com
exists if you ever need a test domain that doesn't serve content.
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.
Yeah sounds good. This was just in here but I like switching it out.
resource.TestCheckResourceAttr("consul_service.google", "address", "lb.google.com"), | ||
), | ||
}, | ||
}, |
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.
My only real nitpick with this test is that it checks that the tests modified what they were supposed to, but doesn't check that the things they weren't supposed to modify are still what we can expect. If there's a bug that causes a field to get unset in state, or set to a wrong value in state, on update this won't catch it.
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.
Sure, totally fair. Going to add some more checks.
website/docs/r/service.html.markdown
Outdated
|
||
## Attributes Reference | ||
|
||
The following attributes are exported: | ||
|
||
* `service_id` - The id of the service, defaults to the value of `name`. | ||
* `id` - The ID of the service. |
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'd highly recommend storing IDs that mean something to users in something other than id
, because we often have to overload those for import, and it gets your users in the habit of treating id
as opaque while still making the information accessible.
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.
You're totally right, this change was not needed actually, we already expose service_id
for this purpose. Fixed the docs and updated a test to check my assumption there.
page_title: "Consul: consul_catalog_nodes" | ||
sidebar_current: "docs-consul-data-source-catalog-nodes" | ||
page_title: "Consul: consul_nodes" | ||
sidebar_current: "docs-consul-data-source-nodes" |
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.
You also need to update these in website/consul.erb or the sidebar highlighting won't work anymore.
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.
Fixed, thanks!
consul/resource_consul_service.go
Outdated
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ func resourceConsulServiceCreate(d *schema.ResourceData, meta interface{}) error | |||
// managed by the consul_node resource (or datasource) | |||
nodeCheck, _, err := client.Catalog().Node(node, &consulapi.QueryOptions{Datacenter: dc}) | |||
if err != nil { | |||
return fmt.Errorf("Cannot retrieve node: %v", err) | |||
return fmt.Errorf("Cannot retrieve node '%s': %v", node, err) |
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.
Tip for future: %q
will correctly quote and escape strings.
Not worth changing, just thought I'd call it out in case you weren't aware.
consul/resource_consul_service.go
Outdated
@@ -135,9 +135,11 @@ func resourceConsulServiceCreate(d *schema.ResourceData, meta interface{}) error | |||
return fmt.Errorf("Failed to register service (dc: '%s'): %v", dc, err) | |||
} | |||
|
|||
// Retrieve the service again to get the canonical service ID. We can't | |||
// get this back from the register call or through |
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.
It looks like you dropped part of this comment?
All the changes made look good to me. I think the code of this looks fine, with the exception of that deprecated resource. I haven't run the tests yet, but I'll do that and make sure they still pass for me, too. I'd say we're good to go on this if we can't get a better solution to that deprecated resource in time. I'm going to work on a PR today to make it possible to deprecate an entire resource. I'll link it from here. If we can get that reviewed and merged to Terraform core this week, I'd much rather we go down that road. And it seems like that's possible? So if we can do that, and you can just vendor Terraform at that commit, and update the resource in question to use the new Deprecated property, I think that's a better way forward, if we can make the timeline work. If we get tight on time, I'm reluctantly OK with merging this as-is, because absent a Terraform core change, I don't see a better solution. |
hashicorp/terraform#18286 has been opened to make it so providers can deprecate resources. :) |
As of hashicorp/terraform@ec998a2, we have support for deprecating resources, not just fields. @pearkes, do you want to update your vendored copy and we can fix how the consul_agent_self data source is deprecated? |
@paddycarver Awesome. Will work on an update and ping you for a final look! |
@paddycarver updated to that version and utilizing it in 497123c! Here's the output in practice, looks great:
|
This moves the consul_service resource to the catalog APIs for service registration and deregistration. Agent APIs are intended for service management on-node, which Terraform is not designed for. This requires 'node' be set for each service, and for the node to exist. It will not allow an upsert, as is the behavior of the Consul API.
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.
Tests pass in CI, Travis is happy again, and our resource deprecations look great.
Amazing job @pearkes, this looks fantastic. Super excited for 2.0.0!
You may want to review #46 for more context on these changes, as they are part of a larger effort to simplify the user experience of the provider.
Motivation
This PR includes major backwards incompatible changes from the current version of the provider. This was required due to:
Changes
consul_agent_self
has been deprecated. It does not work at all on Consul 1.0+ due to an upstream change. Because it had no required attributes, I've added one nameddeprecated
which can be set to a boolean value, which then emits a warning stating it will be removed. This is the best UX I could come up with for deprecating an entire resource. Note thatconsul_agent_config
was added in New data source: consul_agent_config #42 which provides some similar functionality.consul_catalog_*
renamed. The catalog datasources were renamed, removing the "catalog" part of the name. This is mostly for clarity as all service/node resources + datasources should use the catalog in the Terraform provider. Aliases were created, so the old naming should still work.consul_agent_service
,consul_catalog_entry
. Warnings have been added about upcoming deprecations for these resources due to the presence ofconsul_node
andconsul_service
.consul_service
changes. Theconsul_service
resource now uses the catalog APIs and requires a node to be specified. Please see this comment for more detail.Overall, I believe this is the least amount of change possible in this release in order to clarify several different problems reported by users of the provider to date, and to lay groundwork for future support of Consul features, covered in detail by #46. It was tough to propose these changes given it could possibly cause significant downstream work, but I believe the trade-off is worth it.
As a reminder, any users wishing to stay on the 1.x.x series of the provider can do so by pinning the version in the provider block:
I'd definitely appreciate review and feedback on both implementation and upgrade strategies.