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

New Resource: azurerm_app_service_certificate #4192

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Sep 1, 2019
Merged

New Resource: azurerm_app_service_certificate #4192

merged 6 commits into from
Sep 1, 2019

Conversation

joakimhellum
Copy link

@joakimhellum joakimhellum commented Aug 30, 2019

Reference to #1136

TODO:

  • Change key_vault_secret_name to key_vault_secret_id

Copy link
Contributor

@tombuildsstuff tombuildsstuff left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

hey @joakimhellum-in

Thanks for this PR - taking a look through I've left a few extra comments in addition to the name -> id change - but this is otherwise looking pretty good 👍

Thanks!

azurerm/resource_arm_app_service_certificate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_app_service_certificate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_app_service_certificate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_app_service_certificate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
website/docs/r/app_service_certificate.html.markdown Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_app_service_certificate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_app_service_certificate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
}

if v, ok := d.GetOk("key_vault_secret_name"); ok {
certificate.CertificateProperties.KeyVaultSecretName = utils.String(v.(string))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thinking about this - would it be worth inferring the Key Vault ID from the Key Vault Secret ID so users didn't need to specify both fields?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This would be very nice. However the Key Vault Secret ID is in format {vaultBaseUrl}/certificates/{certificateName}/{certificateVersion} so on top of the head not completely sure how to best manage this. Will investigate this during weekend.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

good point - FWIW we look this up for the Key Vault child resources (e.g. certificates, keys, secrets) - so it should be possible to reuse the same technique (which calls into this method) :)

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks 🤯 Have made an attempt to reuse this.

@joakimhellum joakimhellum marked this pull request as ready for review August 30, 2019 17:40
@joakimhellum joakimhellum changed the title [WIP] New Resource: azurerm_app_service_certificate New Resource: azurerm_app_service_certificate Aug 30, 2019
@joakimhellum
Copy link
Author

@tombuildsstuff Many thanks for all your help on this. It should be ready for proper review now.

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 @joakimhellum-in, Looks great aside from a few comments i've left inline. Looks like your setting a property that doesn't exist in the schema.

azurerm/resource_arm_app_service_certificate.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
azurerm/resource_arm_app_service_certificate_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@joakimhellum
Copy link
Author

@katbyte Thanks for this 😸 Will remember to run test and acctest next time, and fmt on test configurations.

--- PASS: TestAccAzureRMAppServiceCertificate_Pfx (94.06s)
--- PASS: TestAccAzureRMAppServiceCertificate_PfxNoPassword (95.18s)
--- PASS: TestAccAzureRMAppServiceCertificate_KeyVault (230.18s)

@ghost ghost removed the waiting-response label Sep 1, 2019
@katbyte
Copy link
Collaborator

katbyte commented Sep 1, 2019

No worries! I have a tool in progress that can auto format the blocks fairly well here: https://github.com/katbyte/terrafmt

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 changes @joakimhellum-in! LGTM now 🙂

@katbyte katbyte merged commit 7d608fe into hashicorp:master Sep 1, 2019
katbyte added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2019
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Sep 18, 2019

This has been released in version 1.34.0 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 = "~> 1.34.0"
}
# ... other configuration ...

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Oct 2, 2019

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!

@ghost ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 2, 2019
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.

3 participants