-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add oauth2_authorization and openid_authentication #7617
Conversation
Hi @sirlatrom Could you rebase against origin master and skip the commit that includes the Thanks! |
Signed-off-by: Sune Keller <[email protected]>
…ApiManagementApi_basicClassic Signed-off-by: Sune Keller <[email protected]>
…penidAuthentication Signed-off-by: Sune Keller <[email protected]>
@jackofallops Update: Cannot find anything mentioning Update 2: Found them by the name |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @sirlatrom
Thanks for this PR, apologies it took a while to get back to it after the initial comments.
I've left some comments and suggestions below, and a question on the validation for the OAuth scope. I'm not sure how the service would react to an update that contained an empty string there, rather than a nil value? Could we add update tests that exercise changes on these?
Thanks
azurerm/internal/services/apimanagement/api_management_api_resource.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
azurerm/internal/services/apimanagement/api_management_api_resource.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
azurerm/internal/services/apimanagement/api_management_api_resource.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
azurerm/internal/services/apimanagement/api_management_api_resource.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Steve <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Steve <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sune Keller <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @sirlatrom
Thanks for the quick turnaround. Just a couple of errors in the tests to fix-up and this is good to go.
Thanks again!
azurerm/internal/services/apimanagement/tests/api_management_api_resource_test.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
azurerm/internal/services/apimanagement/tests/api_management_api_resource_test.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: Sune Keller <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Steve <[email protected]>
@jackofallops I've fixed the test errors as per your suggestions and the PR should be good to go now. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @sirlatrom
Apologies for taking so long to get back to this, it's been a busy few weeks.
I was about to run the acceptance tests and I spotted a panic (commented below) which sparked some additional schema implementation thinking (sorry!). If you can respond or update as you feel appropriate I'll try and stay on top of this one as quickly as I can.
azurerm/internal/services/apimanagement/api_management_api_resource.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
azurerm/internal/services/apimanagement/api_management_api_resource.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
ValidateFunc: validate.ApiManagementChildName, | ||
}, | ||
"bearer_token_sending_methods": { | ||
Type: schema.TypeSet, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this be a set? Thinking over it, there are only 2 possible values, would it not be more appropriate to have these as individual bools?
Signed-off-by: Sune Keller <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Steve <[email protected]>
Thanks for finding that! Sets are used so rarely that it's error prone to follow my usual procedure: copy & paste. |
Signed-off-by: Sune Keller <[email protected]>
Hi, i bumped into this issue because it was exactly what we were missing. Nice to see that @sirlatrom took the time to add this ❤ The only thing blocking this is the very rarely used property bearerTokenSendingMethods which is an array in the Azure rest API as well. so the current solution of @sirlatrom seems to fit well for me because it is closer to the actual Azure API compared to 2 separate booleans. What do you think is needed to close this pr @jackofallops |
Hi @sirlatrom - apologies for taking a while to get back to this again. I should have mentioned the knock on changes that would be needed to accept the previous suggestion, sorry. I've pushed what I think should sort that out so I can run the tests on this without tying up my laptop for hours (they take quite a while to run). I'll finish fixing up anything I've missed and get this merged asap. |
It looks to me like you made the right changes. If you need me to do anything more on this PR I'll be able to do so Monday CEST. |
Thanks! I'm getting tired I think, made a silly mistake on the flatten so that panicked on the test run. I've fixed that and kicked it off again so I'll check the results first thing Monday. |
This has been released in version 2.24.0 of the provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading. As an example: provider "azurerm" {
version = "~> 2.24.0"
}
# ... other configuration ... |
I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues. If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. If you feel I made an error 🤖 🙉 , please reach out to my human friends 👉 [email protected]. Thanks! |
Fixes #3341.