* website: Edit text of new TF_IGNORE env var docs
Fixing one broken link, and tidying the sentences a bit.
* typo
Co-authored-by: Pam Selle <pam@hashicorp.com>
This example doesn't really show how these values should be used. The
default of retry_on_exit_code is now already when most people want, so
this line is not needed in most cases.
I think the docs describe the new options just fine, so lets leave this
out...
This is an initial draft of documentation for this new feature of the
CLI configuration. This is mainly intended as a placeholder for now,
because there are other documentation updates pending for the new provider
namespacing and installation scheme and we'll likely want to revise these
docs to better complement the broader documentation once it's written.
The providers command has been refactored to use the modern provider types and
ProviderRequirements() functions. This resulted in a breaking change to
the output: it no longer outputs the providers by module and no longer
prints `(inherited)` or `(from state)` to show why a provider is
included. We decided that at this time it was best to stick with the
existing functions and make this change, but if we get feedback from the
community we will revisit.
Additional tests to exercise providers in modules and providers from
state have been included.
A proposed pull request to the AWS provider would change the import behavior of
`aws_security_group`. This preemptive change will help keep the docs accurate if
that gets merged.
Implement a new provider_meta block in the terraform block of modules, allowing provider-keyed metadata to be communicated from HCL to provider binaries.
Bundled in this change for minimal protocol version bumping is the addition of markdown support for attribute descriptions and the ability to indicate when an attribute is deprecated, so this information can be shown in the schema dump.
Co-authored-by: Paul Tyng <paul@paultyng.net>
Previously the templatefile function would permit any arbitrary string as
a variable name, but due to the HCL template syntax it would be impossible
to refer to one that isn't a valid HCL identifier without causing an
HCL syntax error.
The HCL syntax errors are correct, but don't really point to the root
cause of the problem. Instead, we'll pre-verify that the variable names
are valid before we even try to render the template, and given a
specialized error message that refers to the vars argument expression as
the problematic part, which will hopefully make the resolution path
clearer for a user encountering this situation.
The syntax error still remains for situations where all of the variable
names are correct but e.g. the user made a typo referring to one, which
makes sense because in that case the problem _is_ inside the template.
* add TencentCloud COS backend for remote state
* add vendor of dependence
* fixed error not handle and remove default value for prefix argument
* get appid from TF_COS_APPID environment variables
* add setdifference and setsubtract functions and docs
* remove setdifference as it is not implemented correct in underlying lib
* Update setintersection.html.md
* Update setproduct.html.md
* Update setunion.html.md
This guide now lives at:
- https://learn.hashicorp.com/terraform#getting-started
...and terraform.io has been redirecting to there for quite a while. This commit
removes the extra copy so that the text of the two versions doesn't drift, and
updates existing links to point to the new location.
This document now lives at:
- https://learn.hashicorp.com/terraform/development/running-terraform-in-automation
...and terraform.io has been redirecting to there for quite a while. This commit
removes the extra copy so that the text of the two versions doesn't drift, and
updates existing links to point to the new location.
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.
These are intended to make it easier to work with arbitrary data
structures whose shape might not be known statically, such as the result
of jsondecode(...) or yamldecode(...) of data from a separate system.
For example, in an object value which has attributes that may or may not
be set we can concisely provide a fallback value to use when the attribute
isn't set:
try(local.example.foo, "fallback-foo")
Using a "try to evaluate" model rather than explicit testing fits better
with the usual programming model of the Terraform language where values
are normally automatically converted to the necessary type where possible:
the given expression is subject to all of the same normal type conversions,
which avoids inadvertently creating a more restrictive evaluation model
as might happen if this were handled using checks like a hypothetical
isobject(...) function, etc.
In earlier versions of Terraform the result of terraform state show was
in the pre-0.12 "flatmap" structure that was unable to reflect nested
data structures. That was fixed in Terraform 0.12, but as a consequence
this statement about the output being machine-parseable (which was
debateable even in older versions) is incorrect.
Fortunately, we now have "terraform show -json" to get output that is
intentionally machine-parseable, so we'll recommend to use that instead
here. The JSON output of that command is a superset of what's produced by
"terraform state show", so should be usable to meet any use-case that
might previously have been met by parsing the "terraform state show"
output.
Right now, the only environment variable available is the same
environment variable that will be picked up by the GCP provider. Users
would like to be able to store state in separate projects or accounts or
otherwise authenticate to the provider with a service account that
doesn't have access to the state. This seems like a reasonable enough
practice to me, and the solution seems straightforward--offer an
environment variable that doesn't mean anything to the provider to
configure the backend credentials. I've added GOOGLE_BACKEND_CREDENTIALS
to manage just the backend credentials, and documented it appropriately.
It's a common source of errors to try to produce JSON or YAML syntax
using string concatenation via our template language but to miss some
details like correct string escaping, quoting, required commas, etc.
The jsonencode and yamlencode functions are a better way to generate JSON
and YAML, but it's not immediately obvious that both of these functions
are available for use in external templates (via templatefile) too.
Given that questions related to this come up a lot in our community forum
and elsewhere, it seems worth having a documentation section to show the
pattern of having a template that consists only of a single function call.
When warnings appear in isolation (not accompanied by an error) it's
reasonable to want to defer resolving them for a while because they are
not actually blocking immediate work.
However, our warning messages tend to be long by default in order to
include all of the necessary context to understand the implications of
the warning, and that can make them overwhelming when combined with other
output.
As a compromise, this adds a new CLI option -compact-warnings which is
supported for all the main operation commands and which uses a more
compact format to print out warnings as long as they aren't also
accompanied by errors.
The default remains unchanged except that the threshold for consolidating
warning messages is reduced to one so that we'll now only show one of
each distinct warning summary.
Full warning messages are always shown if there's at least one error
included in the diagnostic set too, because in that case the warning
message could contain additional context to help understand the error.
There are a few situations that we've seen arise quite commonly for folks
upgrading from Terraform 0.11 to 0.12. These particular problems are not
things that Terraform 0.12 can fix automatically during upgrading, but
we can at least give some better feedback to users that they ought to be
addressed _before_ upgrading.
The provider address problem is already detected and flagged by the
"terraform 0.11checklist" command that folks should run as part of their
upgrade process, but the module address problem is not something we
noticed was lacking validation in 0.11 and so the checklist tool doesn't
cover it. Due to the lack of coverage in the checklist tool, this commit
also includes an additional section in the upgrade guide that mentions
the problem and gives instructions on how to address it.
I've seen folks ask about how to express this in resource address syntax
a number of times now, so adding this example here to illustrate how it
looks when there are multiple levels of module to traverse through.
This is redundant with other information further up the page, but having
it as an entirely separate example gives an opportunity to include more
introductory text to explain what the example is showing.
There are some differences between the Terraform CLI and Terraform Cloud ideas of workspaces.
This documentation aims to explain those differences and show different patterns for configuring the remote backend and the implications of different approaches.
As mentioned in #17871 the current example can hide the fact that the module
path plays an important role. The example's explanation is expanded.
Moreover, the verb "attach" is replaced with "map" to make the vocabulary
consistent with the wording in the documentation of the terraform state.
A very common question since we launched the two repetition constructs
is how to deal with situations where the input data structure doesn't
match one-to-one with the desired configuration.
This adds some full worked examples of two common situations that have
come up in questions. To avoid adding a lot of extra content to the
already-large "expressions" and "resources" pages, the main bulk of this
new content lives with the relevant functions themselves as a full example
of one thing they are good for, and then we'll link to them from the two
general documentation sections where folks are likely to be reading when
they encounter the problem.
Alisdair McDiarmid