Fix failing unit test for parseImportID

[jrhouston]

Description

This unit test was failing because parseImportID will set namespace to default if it's not present. We would have to check if the kind was a namespaced resource to figure out if we should omit it or not. AFAIK namespace should just get ignored for non-namespaced resources so this should be fine for now.

Acceptance tests

• Have you added an acceptance test for the functionality being added?
• Have you run the acceptance tests on this branch?

Output from acceptance testing:

$ make testacc TESTARGS='-run=TestAccXXX'

...

Release Note

Release note for CHANGELOG:

NONE

References

Community Note

• Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
• If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

[jrhouston]

Took me a minute to figure out which case was actually failing so I made this a bit more readable.

[keithmattix]

I actually took the opposite approach in my PR because I would think cluster scoped resources (like ClusterRole, or MutatingWebhookConfiguration) wouldn't need to carry around a namespace in their TF ID. If I'm wrong about that, I'm definitely open to modifying my PR

[alexsomesan]

LGTM! Nice improvement!

[jrhouston]

I actually took the opposite approach in my PR because I would think cluster scoped resources (like ClusterRole, or MutatingWebhookConfiguration) wouldn't need to carry around a namespace in their TF ID. If I'm wrong about that, I'm definitely open to modifying my PR

Thanks for commenting @keithmattix – I think it has to be this way around, otherwise people will always have to specify a namespace= in the import ID even if it is default. We want the function to set the namespace to default if it's not present. Ideally the function would check if the kind is namespaced or not. I've added a FIXME to tidy this up later, for the moment I just want to get the tests passing in main again.

[github-actions]

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 issues.
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.