2014-09-26 23:23:38 +02:00
|
|
|
---
|
2020-08-15 03:51:06 +02:00
|
|
|
layout: "language"
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
page_title: "Modules Landing Page - Configuration Language"
|
2014-09-26 23:23:38 +02:00
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
# Modules Landing Page
|
2014-09-26 23:23:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
To improve navigation, we've split the old Modules page into several smaller
|
|
|
|
|
pages.
|
2019-01-17 01:30:43 +01:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
<a id="calling-a-child-module"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="accessing-module-output-values"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="transferring-resource-state-into-modules"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="tainting-resources-within-a-module"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="module-versions"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="other-meta-arguments"></a>
|
2020-07-31 22:16:35 +02:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
## Syntax and Elements of Module Blocks
|
2018-12-11 01:14:33 +01:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
This information has moved to
|
|
|
|
|
[Module Blocks](/docs/configuration/blocks/modules/syntax.html).
|
2014-09-26 23:23:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
<a id="multiple-instances-of-a-module"></a>
|
2014-09-26 23:23:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
## Multiple Instances with `count` and `for_each`
|
2020-03-23 19:00:11 +01:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
This information has moved to
|
|
|
|
|
[`count`](/docs/configuration/meta-arguments/count.html) and
|
|
|
|
|
[`for_each`](/docs/configuration/meta-arguments/for_each.html).
|
2018-05-06 05:38:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
<a id="providers-within-modules"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="provider-version-constraints-in-modules"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="implicit-provider-inheritance"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="passing-providers-explicitly"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="proxy-configuration-blocks"></a>
|
|
|
|
|
<a id="legacy-shared-modules-with-provider-configurations"></a>
|
2014-09-26 23:23:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
## Handling Provider Configurations in Re-usable Modules
|
2018-05-06 05:38:38 +02:00
|
|
|
|
website: Break up main Modules and Module Development pages
This one is a lot like the previous two commits, but slightly more complex:
- Only adding one new meta-argument page, for `providers`; otherwise, it just
re-uses the dual-purpose pages I made in the resources commit.
- About that `providers` argument: The stuff that was relevant to consumers of a
module went in that meta-argument page, but there was also a huge deep dive on
how the _author_ of a re-usable module should handle provider configurations
in cases where inheriting the default providers isn't sufficient. THAT, I
moved into a new page in the module development section. (For the consumer of
a module, this should all be an implementation detail; the module README
should tell you which aliased providers you need to configure and pass, and
then you just do it, without worrying about proxy configuration blocks etc.)
- The "standard module structure" recommendations in the main module development
page gets a page of its own, to make it more prominent and discoverable.
- Same deal with using the old URL as a landing page, at least for the main
module calls page. It didn't seem necessary for the module development page.
2020-11-13 03:21:35 +01:00
|
|
|
This information has moved to
|
|
|
|
|
[The `providers` Meta-Argument](/docs/configuration/meta-arguments/module-providers.html)
|
|
|
|
|
(for users of re-usable modules) and
|
|
|
|
|
[Providers Within Modules](/docs/modules/providers.html)
|
|
|
|
|
(for module developers).
|