r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new resource #6528

gazoakley · 2018-11-20T08:37:46Z

Partially addresses #6527

Output from acceptance testing:

$ make testacc TESTARGS='-run=TestAccAwsRamResourceShare'
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./... -v -parallel 20 -run=TestAccAwsRamResourceShare -timeout 120m
?   	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws	[no test files]
=== RUN   TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_basic
=== CONT  TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_basic
--- PASS: TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_basic (20.72s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/aws	20.765s

bflad · 2018-12-21T13:16:06Z

Hey @gazoakley 👋 I'm guessing this is work in progress due to the acceptance testing? Anything we can help with? Since we now support EC2 Transit Gateway and License Manager Configurations, maybe we can use either of those for testing? Thanks so much for all your great contributions!

bflad

Two quick little drive-by comments since I know this is work in progress 👍

bflad · 2018-12-21T13:18:14Z

aws/config.go

@@ -143,6 +144,7 @@ type Config struct {
 	KinesisAnalyticsEndpoint string
 	KmsEndpoint              string
 	LambdaEndpoint           string
+	RamEndpoint              string


Since we're not wiring up endpoint customization in the provider configuration (see aws/provider.go) we should either implement it or remove it here, e.g. removing this line, awsRamSess and using client.ramconn = ram.New(sess) 👍

This still needs to be addressed either which way. 😄

aws/resource_aws_ram_resource_share.go

gazoakley · 2018-12-21T13:43:58Z

Hi @bflad - at the time I started writing this AWS hadn't announced what you could share using it 😄. I'm planning to write acceptance tests using VPCs since they can be constructed/torn down quickly during acceptance tests.

What I've got kind of works, but I'm thinking it would be better to split resource_arns and principals out of this resource into some kind of aws_ram_association. It looks like adding/removing from/to those can take time, and separating them out would allow Terraform to track the progress of them individually much better. The code currently doesn't wait for associations to move to the "ASSOCIATED"/"DISASSOCIATED" status: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ram/latest/APIReference/API_ResourceShareAssociation.html

The design then becomes something along the lines of:

resource "aws_ram_resource_share" "example" {
  name = "Example"
  allow_external_principals = true
}

resource "aws_ram_association" "example" {
  resource_share_arn = "${aws_ram_resource_share.example.arn}"
  association_type = "PRINCIPAL"
  associated_entity = "123456789012"
}

resource "aws_ram_association" "example" {
  resource_share_arn = "${aws_ram_resource_share.example.arn}"
  association_type = "RESOURCE"
  associated_entity = "<some_vpc_arn>"
}

Or better still in my mind:

resource "aws_ram_resource_share" "example" {
  name = "Example"
  allow_external_principals = true
}

resource "aws_ram_principal_association" "example" {
  resource_share_arn = "${aws_ram_resource_share.example.arn}"
  principal = "123456789012"
  # external - calculated field that is only applicable to principals associated to a resource share
}

resource "aws_ram_resource_association" "example" {
  resource_share_arn = "${aws_ram_resource_share.example.arn}"
  resource_arn = "<some_vpc_arn>"
}

Any thoughts?

bflad · 2018-12-21T16:00:21Z

@gazoakley looking at the API, I would agree with your assessment and the second approach with two associations resources. The time tracking is likely pretty important from an infrastructure management standpoint to allow a single Terraform configuration to perform downstream actions when the associations are actually ready. 👍

If you could split those new resources from this PR, we can likely get this resource merged then work on the association bits separately. 🚀

gazoakley · 2018-12-28T08:17:35Z

@bflad I've done the split - will open PRs for the associations later

gazoakley · 2018-12-28T15:35:52Z

Unfortunately there's an issue in aws-sdk-go or the RAM API that prevents us from easily checking if a resource share isn't found: aws/aws-sdk-go#2377

bflad

Hey again, @gazoakley! For this one some minor stuff and it should be good to go! I'm not sure if we should implement the suggested Go SDK workaround with the error handling, but I think this is acceptable either which way in that regard. Thanks for all your hard work!

bflad · 2019-01-08T17:43:48Z

aws/config.go

@@ -143,6 +144,7 @@ type Config struct {
 	KinesisAnalyticsEndpoint string
 	KmsEndpoint              string
 	LambdaEndpoint           string
+	RamEndpoint              string


This still needs to be addressed either which way. 😄

bflad · 2019-01-08T17:50:35Z

aws/resource_aws_ram_resource_share.go

+	return &schema.Resource{
+		Create: resourceAwsRamResourceShareCreate,
+		Read:   resourceAwsRamResourceShareRead,
+		Update: resourceAwsRamResourceShareUpdate,


We should add at least one acceptance test that exercises Update 😄

bflad · 2019-01-08T17:53:00Z

aws/resource_aws_ram_resource_share.go

+	}
+
+	stateConf := &resource.StateChangeConf{
+		Pending: []string{ram.ResourceShareStatusDeleting},


We may also want to include ram.ResourceShareStatusActive in the Pending list in case there is any delay the start of the process. 👍

bflad

LGTM, thanks @gazoakley! 🚀 FYI I addressed the remaining minor review items in a followup commit (1070d83) so we can get this released, I hope you don't mind.

Output from acceptance testing:

--- PASS: TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_basic (13.39s)
--- PASS: TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_Name (20.76s)
--- PASS: TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_AllowExternalPrincipals (21.53s)
--- PASS: TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_Tags (29.14s)

Changes: * Remove incomplete implementation for provider-level RAM endpoint configuration * Add covering acceptance testing for updates of all attributes Output from acceptance testing: ``` --- PASS: TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_basic (13.39s) --- PASS: TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_Name (20.76s) --- PASS: TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_AllowExternalPrincipals (21.53s) --- PASS: TestAccAwsRamResourceShare_Tags (29.14s) ```

bflad · 2019-01-16T04:13:54Z

This has been released in version 1.56.0 of the AWS provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading.

piersf · 2019-01-26T21:22:07Z

@bflad the Terraform documentation shows only about aws_ram_resource_share. Has there been anything else released?

bflad · 2019-01-26T23:23:39Z

@piersf you can follow these for updates:

RAM feature request issue: Feature Request: AWS Resource Access Manager #6527
Pull request for new aws_ram_principal_association resource: [WIP] r/aws_ram_principal_association: Add aws_ram_principal_association resource #7219
CHANGELOG: https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md

ghost · 2020-04-01T17:18:55Z

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. Thanks!

gazoakley changed the title ~~r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new resource~~ [WIP] r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new resource Nov 20, 2018

bflad added new-resource Introduces a new resource. service/ram Issues and PRs that pertain to the ram service. labels Nov 21, 2018

gazoakley mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2018

Support route53resolver #6525

Closed

gazoakley force-pushed the f-ram-resource-share-ii branch from 3861a25 to 9dafc45 Compare November 22, 2018 04:29

ghost added size/XL Managed by automation to categorize the size of a PR. and removed size/XXL Managed by automation to categorize the size of a PR. labels Nov 22, 2018

bflad removed the dependencies Used to indicate dependency changes. label Nov 25, 2018

bflad reviewed Dec 21, 2018

View reviewed changes

r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new aws_ram_resource_share resource

5ad9071

gazoakley force-pushed the f-ram-resource-share-ii branch from 0b4647e to 5ad9071 Compare December 28, 2018 08:12

gazoakley changed the title ~~[WIP] r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new resource~~ r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new resource Dec 28, 2018

r/aws_ram_resource_share: Fix up tests

b2a2a02

bflad reviewed Jan 8, 2019

View reviewed changes

bflad added the waiting-response Maintainers are waiting on response from community or contributor. label Jan 9, 2019

ewbankkit mentioned this pull request Jan 10, 2019

Tech debt: Consistently handle overlapping resource tags when updating #7052

Closed

bflad added this to the v1.56.0 milestone Jan 15, 2019

bflad approved these changes Jan 15, 2019

View reviewed changes

bflad merged commit b2a2a02 into hashicorp:master Jan 15, 2019

bflad added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 15, 2019

Update CHANGELOG for #6528

7a2a7c4

bflad mentioned this pull request Jan 15, 2019

Feature Request: AWS Resource Access Manager #6527

Closed

ghost removed the waiting-response Maintainers are waiting on response from community or contributor. label Jan 26, 2019

ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 1, 2020

gazoakley deleted the f-ram-resource-share-ii branch April 7, 2020 16:17

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new resource #6528

r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new resource #6528

gazoakley commented Nov 20, 2018 •

edited

bflad commented Dec 21, 2018

bflad left a comment

bflad Dec 21, 2018

bflad Jan 8, 2019

gazoakley commented Dec 21, 2018

bflad commented Dec 21, 2018

gazoakley commented Dec 28, 2018

gazoakley commented Dec 28, 2018

bflad left a comment

bflad Jan 8, 2019

bflad Jan 8, 2019

bflad Jan 8, 2019

bflad left a comment

bflad commented Jan 16, 2019

piersf commented Jan 26, 2019

bflad commented Jan 26, 2019

ghost commented Apr 1, 2020

r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new resource #6528

r/aws_ram_resource_share: Add new resource #6528

Conversation

gazoakley commented Nov 20, 2018 • edited

bflad commented Dec 21, 2018

bflad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad Dec 21, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad Jan 8, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

gazoakley commented Dec 21, 2018

bflad commented Dec 21, 2018

gazoakley commented Dec 28, 2018

gazoakley commented Dec 28, 2018

bflad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad Jan 8, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad Jan 8, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad Jan 8, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bflad commented Jan 16, 2019

piersf commented Jan 26, 2019

bflad commented Jan 26, 2019

ghost commented Apr 1, 2020

gazoakley commented Nov 20, 2018 •

edited