Since we now have a guide that recommends some specific ways to run
Terraform in automation, we can mimic those suggestions in an e2e test and
thus ensure they keep working.
Here we test the three different approaches suggested in the guide:
- init, plan, apply (main case)
- init, apply (e.g. for deploying to a QA/staging environment)
- init, plan (e.g. for verifying a pull request)
In 6712192724 we stopped counting data
source destroys in the destroy tally since they are an implementation
detail.
This caused this test to start failing, though since the new behavior is
correct here we just update the test to match.
Shell tab completion for all of the subcommands under
"terraform workspace", providing the appropriate kind of auto-complete for
each argument, along with completion for for any flags.
This helper is a Predictor for the "complete" package that tries to
auto-complete workspace names from the current backend, if it's
initialized and operable.
The predictors built in to the "complete" package assume that the same
type of argument is repeated indefinitely, but most Terraform commands
don't work like that, so this helper allows us to define a sequence of
predictors that apply to each argument in turn.
This new option allows importing without configuration present.
Configuration is required by default as a confirmation that the provided resource name is correct, but it can be useful to override this in tools that wrap Terraform to do more involved operations.
In #15884 we adjusted the plan output to give an explicit command to run
to apply a plan, whereas before this command was just alluded to in the
prose.
Since releasing that, we've got good feedback that it's confusing to
include such instructions when Terraform is running in a workflow
automation tool, because such tools usually abstract away exactly what
commands are run and require users to take different actions to
proceed through the workflow.
To accommodate such environments while retaining helpful messages for
normal CLI usage, here we introduce a new environment variable
TF_IN_AUTOMATION which, when set to a non-empty value, is a hint to
Terraform that it isn't being run in an interactive command shell and
it should thus tone down the "next steps" messaging.
The documentation for this setting is included as part of the "...in
automation" guide since it's not generally useful in other cases. We also
intentionally disclaim comprehensive support for this since we want to
avoid creating an extreme number of "if running in automation..."
codepaths that would increase the testing matrix and hurt maintainability.
The focus is specifically on the output of the three commands we give in
the automation guide, which at present means the following two situations:
* "terraform init" does not include the final paragraphs that suggest
running "terraform plan" and tell you in what situations you might need
to re-run "terraform init".
* "terraform plan" does not include the final paragraphs that either
warn about not specifying "-out=..." or instruct to run
"terraform apply" with the generated plan file.
In 3ea1592 the plan rendering was refactored to add an extra indirection
of producing a display-oriented plan object first and then rendering from
that object.
There was a logic error while adapting the existing plan rendering code
to use the new display-oriented object: the core InstanceDiff object sets
the "Destroy" flag (a boolean) for both DiffDestroy and DiffDestroyCreate,
and so this code previously checked r.Destroy to recognize the
"destroy-create" case. This was incorrectly adapted to a check for the
display action being DiffDestroy, when it should actually have been
DiffDestroyCreate.
The effect of this bug was to cause the "(forces new resource)"
annotations to not be displayed on attributes, though the resource-level
information still correctly reflected that a new resource was required.
This fix restores the attribute-level annotations.
The previous diff presentation was rather "wordy", and not very friendly
to those who can't see color either because they have color-blindness or
because they don't have a color-supporting terminal.
This new presentation uses the actual symbols used in the plan output
and tries to be more concise. It also uses some framing characters to
try to separate the different stages of "terraform plan" to make it
easier to visually navigate.
The apply command also adopts this new plan presentation, in preparation
for "terraform apply" (with interactive plan confirmation) becoming the
primary, safe workflow in the next major release.
Finally, we standardize on the terminology "perform" and "actions" rather
than "execute" and "changes" to reflect the fact that reading is now an
action and that isn't actually a _change_.
Previously the rendered plan output was constructed directly from the
core plan and then annotated with counts derived from the count hook.
At various places we applied little adjustments to deal with the fact that
the user-facing diff model is not identical to the internal diff model,
including the special handling of data source reads and destroys. Since
this logic was just muddled into the rendering code, it behaved
inconsistently with the tally of adds, updates and deletes.
This change reworks the plan formatter so that it happens in two stages:
- First, we produce a specialized Plan object that is tailored for use
in the UI. This applies all the relevant logic to transform the
physical model into the user model.
- Second, we do a straightforward visual rendering of the display-oriented
plan object.
For the moment this is slightly overkill since there's only one rendering
path, but it does give us the benefit of letting the counts be derived
from the same data as the full detailed diff, ensuring that they'll stay
consistent.
Later we may choose to have other UIs for plans, such as a
machine-readable output intended to drive a web UI. In that case, we'd
want the web UI to consume a serialization of the _display-oriented_ plan
so that it doesn't need to re-implement all of these UI special cases.
This introduces to core a new diff action type for "refresh". Currently
this is used _only_ in the UI layer, to represent data source reads.
Later it would be good to use this type for the core diff as well, to
improve consistency, but that is left for another day to keep this change
focused on the UI.
Previously we were checking required_version only during "real" operations, and not during initialization. Catching it during init is better because that's the first command users run on a new working directory.
Go 1.9 adds this new function which, when called, marks the caller as
being a "helper function". Helper function stack frames are then skipped
when trying to find a line of test code to blame for a test failure, so
that the code in the main test function appears in the test failure output
rather than a line within the helper function itself.
This covers many -- but probaly not all -- of our test helpers across
various packages.
Fix the -state and -state-out wording to be consistent with other
commands. Remove the erroneous reference to remote state in the website
version of the flag description.
While the `local.Local` backend is the only implementation of
`backend.Local`, creating the backend with `ForceLocal` bypasses the
`backend.Backend` in the `local.Local` causing a local state to be
implicitly created rather than using the configured state backend.
Add a test that imports into a configured backend (using the "local"
backend as a remote state proxy). This further confirms the confusing
nature of ForceLocal, as the backend _is_ local, but not from the
viewpoint of meta.Backend.
This restores the earlier behavior of the first positional argument to
terraform init in 0.9, but as a command line option.
The positional argument was removed to improve consistency with other
commands that take a working directory as their first positional argument.
It was originally intended that this functionality would return in a
later release along with some other general improvements to Terraform's
module handling, but we're introducing here an interim solution that
uses the existing module source concept, to allow for easier porting of
workflows that previously depended on the automatic copy behavior.
In a future release this feature may change again as the module
improvements design firms up, but we expect it to be broadly compatible
with this temporary state.
In order to use a backend for the state commands, we need an initialized
meta. Use a single Meta instance rather than temporary ones to make sure
the backends are initialized properly.
This e2etest runs an init, plan, apply, destroy sequence against a test
configuration using the real template and null providers downloaded from
the official repository.
This test _does_ trample a bit on the scope of some already-existing
tests, but this is mainly just to check our assumptions about how
Terraform behaves to ensure that we can reach our main conclusion here:
that the main Terraform workflow commands interact correctly with each
other in real use and we can complete the full workflow.
Martin Atkins