feat(lambda): add removalPolicy option to LayerVersionPermission

[lewesche]

Issue # (if applicable)

Closes #30686.

Reason for this change

My use case involves publishing a lambda layer consumed by a library. Users may be on different library versions, meaning they may be on different layer versions. These users need to be able to access the layer from different accounts across my organization.

At first I added resource permissions to the layer by calling ILayerVersion.addPermission(). However I noticed that when new layers were published, old layers lost their resource permissions. I confirmed this with the cli: aws lambda get-layer-version-policy --layer-name ... --version-number ....

Looking at the I was able to fix the behavior by manually constructing the CfnLayerVersionPermission instead of using the top level addPermission() function:

    const orgPermission = new CfnLayerVersionPermission(this, "qualtricsOrgPermissionAmd64", {
      action: 'lambda:GetLayerVersion',
      layerVersionArn: lambdaLayer.layerVersionArn,
      principal: '*',
      organizationId: constants.ORG_ID,
    });
    orgPermission.applyRemovalPolicy(cdk.RemovalPolicy.RETAIN);

This added "UpdateReplacePolicy": "Retain", "DeletionPolicy": "Retain" to the cloud formation template (according to this documentation, both are required). That fixed my issue but it's an ugly solution that was difficult to come up with. I'd like to be able to use addPermission()

Description of changes

I changed LayerVersionPermission to take a optional RemovalPolicy.

Description of how you validated changes

Easy to validate with unit tests

Checklist

• My code adheres to the CONTRIBUTING GUIDE and DESIGN GUIDELINES

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license

[aws-cdk-automation]

The pull request linter has failed. See the aws-cdk-automation comment below for failure reasons. If you believe this pull request should receive an exemption, please comment and provide a justification.

A comment requesting an exemption should contain the text Exemption Request. Additionally, if clarification is needed add Clarification Request to a comment.

[lewesche]

I'd like to request a Exemption Request or Clarification Request on the integration tests - I'm having trouble getting those to run and generate a new snapshot.

If I could get help with those, or a excemption since this change is pretty simple, that'd be great :) Thanks!

[aws-cdk-automation]

AWS CodeBuild CI Report

• CodeBuild project: AutoBuildv2Project1C6BFA3F-wQm2hXv2jqQv
• Commit ID: 786668c
• Result: SUCCEEDED
• Build Logs (available for 30 days)

Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository

[aws-cdk-automation]

This PR has been in the CHANGES REQUESTED state for 3 weeks, and looks abandoned. To keep this PR from being closed, please continue work on it. If not, it will automatically be closed in a week.

[aws-cdk-automation]

This PR has been deemed to be abandoned, and will be automatically closed. Please create a new PR for these changes if you think this decision has been made in error.

[aws-cdk-automation]

The pull request linter fails with the following errors:

❌ Features must contain a change to an integration test file and the resulting snapshot.

PRs must pass status checks before we can provide a meaningful review.

If you would like to request an exemption from the status checks or clarification on feedback, please leave a comment on this PR containing Exemption Request and/or Clarification Request.

✅ A exemption request has been requested. Please wait for a maintainer's review.