All of the feedback from the experiment described enhancements that can
potentially be added later without breaking changes, so this change simply
removes the experiment gate from the feature as originally implemented
with no changes to its functionality.
Further enhancements may follow in later releases, but the goal of this
change is just to ship the feature exactly as it was under the experiment.
Most of the changes here are cleaning up the experiment opt-ins from our
test cases. The most important parts are in configs/experiments.go and in
experiments/experiment.go .
The existing "type" argument allows specifying a type constraint that
allows for some basic validation, but often there are more constraints on
a variable value than just its type.
This new feature (requiring an experiment opt-in for now, while we refine
it) allows specifying arbitrary validation rules for any variable which
can then cause custom error messages to be returned when a caller provides
an inappropriate value.
variable "example" {
validation {
condition = var.example != "nope"
error_message = "Example value must not be \"nope\"."
}
}
The core parts of this are designed to do as little new work as possible
when no validations are specified, and thus the main new checking codepath
here can therefore only run when the experiment is enabled in order to
permit having validations.
Add deprecation warning for references from destroy provisioners or
their connections to external resources or values. In order to ensure
resource destruction can be completed correctly, destroy nodes must be
able to evaluate with only their instance state.
We have sufficient information to validate destroy-time provisioners
early on during the config loading process. Later on these can be
converted to hard errors, and only allow self, count.index, and each.key
in destroy provisioners. Limited the provisioner and block evaluation
scope later on is tricky, but if the references can never be loaded,
then they will never be encountered during evaluation.
Following on from de652e22a26b, this introduces deprecation warnings for
when an attribute value expression is a template with only a single
interpolation sequence, and for variable type constraints given in quotes.
As with the previous commit, we allowed these deprecated forms with no
warning for a few releases after v0.12.0 to ensure that folks who need to
write cross-compatible modules for a while during upgrading would be able
to do so, but we're now marking these as explicitly deprecated to guide
users towards the new idiomatic forms.
The "terraform 0.12upgrade" tool would've already updated configurations
to not hit these warnings for those who had pre-existing configurations
written for Terraform 0.11.
The main target audience for these warnings are newcomers to Terraform who
are learning from existing examples already published in various spots on
the wider internet that may be showing older Terraform syntax, since those
folks will not be running their configurations through the upgrade tool.
These warnings will hopefully guide them towards modern Terraform usage
during their initial experimentation, and thus reduce the chances of
inadvertently adopting the less-readable legacy usage patterns in
greenfield projects.
Terraform 0.12.0 removed the need for putting references and keywords
in quotes, but we disabled the deprecation warnings for the initial
release in order to avoid creating noise for folks who were intentionally
attempting to maintain modules that were cross-compatible with both
Terraform 0.11 and Terraform 0.12.
However, with Terraform 0.12 now more widely used, the lack of these
warnings seems to be causing newcomers to copy the quoted versions from
existing examples on the internet, which is perpetuating the old and
confusing quoted form in newer configurations.
In preparation for phasing out these deprecated forms altogether in a
future major release, and for the shorter-term benefit of giving better
feedback to newcomers when they are learning from outdated examples, we'll
now re-enable those deprecation warnings, and be explicit that the old
forms are intended for removal in a future release.
In order to properly test this, we establish a new set of test
configurations that explicitly mark which warnings they are expecting and
verify that they do indeed produce those expected warnings. We also
verify that the "success" tests do _not_ produce warnings, while removing
the ones that were previously written to succeed but have their warnings
ignored.
Alisdair McDiarmid