`on_premises_instance_tag_filter`
When setting `on_premises_instance_tag_filter`, Terraform was not
pushing the changes on the cReate (due to a spelling mistake). A second
apply would push the tags and then cause a panic. Terraform was building
a ec2.Tagfilter struct without checking for optional values. When the
TagFilter was being dereferenced, it caused a panic
Several of our vendered dependencies are not gofmt-compliant, but we don't
want to fix that since the vendored code is supposed to exactly match
upstream.
The fix that landed in #6557 was unfortunately the wrong subset of the
work I had been doing locally, and users of the attached bugs are still
reporting problems with Terraform v0.6.16.
At the very last step, I attempted to scope down both the failing test
and the implementation to their bare essentials, but ended up with a
test that did not exercise the root of the problem and a subset of the
implementation that was insufficient for a full bugfix.
The key thing I removed from the test was a _referencing output_ for the
module, which is what breaks down the #6557 solution.
I've re-tested the examples in #5440 and #3268 to verify this solution
does indeed solve the problem.
- Fix sensitive outputs for lists and maps
- Fix test prelude which was missed during conflict resolution
- Fix `terraform output` to match old behaviour and not have outputs
header and colouring
- Bump timeout on TestAtlasClient_UnresolvableConflict
This adds a test and the support necessary to read from native maps
passed as variables via interpolation - for example:
```
resource ...... {
mapValue = "${var.map}"
}
```
We also add support for interpolating maps from the flat-mapped resource
config, which is necessary to support assignment of computed maps, which
is now valid.
Unfortunately there is no good way to distinguish between a list and a
map in the flatmap. In lieu of changing that representation (which is
risky), we assume that if all the keys are numeric, this is intended to
be a list, and if not it is intended to be a map. This does preclude
maps which have purely numeric keys, which should be noted as a
backwards compatibility concern.
Mitchell Hashimoto