It's been a long while since we gave close attention to the codepaths for
module source address parsing and external module package installation.
Due to their age, these codepaths often diverged from our modern practices
such as representing address types in the addrs package, and encapsulating
package installation details only in a particular location.
In particular, this refactor makes source address parsing a separate step
from module installation, which therefore makes the result of that parsing
available to other Terraform subsystems which work with the configuration
representation objects.
This also presented the opportunity to better encapsulate our use of
go-getter into a new package "getmodules" (echoing "getproviders"), which
is intended to be the only part of Terraform that directly interacts with
go-getter.
This is largely just a refactor of the existing functionality into a new
code organization, but there is one notable change in behavior here: the
source address parsing now happens during configuration loading rather
than module installation, which may cause errors about invalid addresses
to be returned in different situations than before. That counts as
backward compatible because we only promise to remain compatible with
configurations that are _valid_, which means that they can be initialized,
planned, and applied without any errors. This doesn't introduce any new
error cases, and instead just makes a pre-existing error case be detected
earlier.
Our module registry client is still using its own special module address
type from registry/regsrc for now, with a small shim from the new
addrs.ModuleSourceRegistry type. Hopefully in a later commit we'll also
rework the registry client to work with the new address type, but this
commit is already big enough as it is.
As the comment notes, this hostname is the default for provide source
addresses. We'll shortly be adding some address types to represent module
source addresses too, and so we'll also have DefaultModuleRegistryHost
for that situation.
(They'll actually both contain the the same hostname, but that's a
coincidence rather than a requirement.)
This is part of a general effort to move all of Terraform's non-library
package surface under internal in order to reinforce that these are for
internal use within Terraform only.
If you were previously importing packages under this prefix into an
external codebase, you could pin to an earlier release tag as an interim
solution until you've make a plan to achieve the same functionality some
other way.
This is part of a general effort to move all of Terraform's non-library
package surface under internal in order to reinforce that these are for
internal use within Terraform only.
If you were previously importing packages under this prefix into an
external codebase, you could pin to an earlier release tag as an interim
solution until you've make a plan to achieve the same functionality some
other way.
We've been using the models from the "moduledeps" package to represent our
provider dependencies everywhere since the idea of provider dependencies
was introduced in Terraform 0.10, but that model is not convenient to use
for any use-case other than the "terraform providers" command that needs
individual-module-level detail.
To make things easier for new codepaths working with the new-style
provider installer, here we introduce a new model type
getproviders.Requirements which is based on the type the new installer was
already taking as its input. We have new methods in the states, configs,
and earlyconfig packages to produce values of this type, and a helper
to merge Requirements together so we can combine config-derived and
state-derived requirements together during installation.
The advantage of this new model over the moduledeps one is that all of
recursive module walking is done up front and we produce a simple, flat
structure that is more convenient for the main use-cases of selecting
providers for installation and then finding providers in the local cache
to use them for other operations.
This new model is _not_ suitable for implementing "terraform providers"
because it does not retain module-specific requirement details. Therefore
we will likely keep using moduledeps for "terraform providers" for now,
and then possibly at a later time consider specializing the moduledeps
logic for only what "terraform providers" needs, because it seems to be
the only use-case that needs to retain that level of detail.
Martin Atkins