Skip to content
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

New data source: azurerm_dynatrace_monitor #28381

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jiaweitao001
Copy link
Contributor

Community Note

  • Please vote on this PR by adding a 👍 reaction to the original PR to help the community and maintainers prioritize for review
  • Please do not leave comments along the lines of "+1", "me too" or "any updates", they generate extra noise for PR followers and do not help prioritize for review

Description

PR Checklist

  • I have followed the guidelines in our Contributing Documentation.
  • I have checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change.
  • I have checked if my changes close any open issues. If so please include appropriate closing keywords below.
  • I have updated/added Documentation as required written in a helpful and kind way to assist users that may be unfamiliar with the resource / data source.
  • I have used a meaningful PR title to help maintainers and other users understand this change and help prevent duplicate work.
    For example: “resource_name_here - description of change e.g. adding property new_property_name_here

Changes to existing Resource / Data Source

  • I have added an explanation of what my changes do and why I'd like you to include them (This may be covered by linking to an issue above, but may benefit from additional explanation).
  • I have written new tests for my resource or datasource changes & updated any relevent documentation.
  • I have successfully run tests with my changes locally. If not, please provide details on testing challenges that prevented you running the tests.
  • (For changes that include a state migration only). I have manually tested the migration path between relevant versions of the provider.

Testing

  • My submission includes Test coverage as described in the Contribution Guide and the tests pass. (if this is not possible for any reason, please include details of why you did or could not add test coverage)

Change Log

Below please provide what should go into the changelog (if anything) conforming to the Changelog Format documented here.

  • azurerm_resource - support for the thing1 property [GH-00000]

This is a (please select all that apply):

  • Bug Fix
  • New Feature (ie adding a service, resource, or data source)
  • Enhancement
  • Breaking Change

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #0000

Note

If this PR changes meaningfully during the course of review please update the title and description as required.

Copy link
Member

@jackofallops jackofallops left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @jiaweitao001 - Thanks for the PR. Some comments to take a look at below if you could please?

Comment on lines +133 to +152
"environment_properties": {
Type: pluginsdk.TypeList,
Computed: true,
Elem: &pluginsdk.Resource{
Schema: map[string]*pluginsdk.Schema{
"environment_info": {
Type: pluginsdk.TypeList,
Computed: true,
Elem: &pluginsdk.Resource{
Schema: map[string]*pluginsdk.Schema{
"environment_id": {
Type: pluginsdk.TypeString,
Computed: true,
},
},
},
},
},
},
},
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a reason we're doing 2 levels of nesting here for a single value? Can this just be flattened to the top level?

Also, this property doesn't appear to be supported by the related resource, should it even be included here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We'd better not flatten this because according to the service team, there are a bunch of other attributes under environment_properties and environment_info, but they do not want them on TF right now. We will have to onboard them once they request in the future.

This property is not supported by the related resource is because it's an optional + computed attribute and its value comes from the API response only, that's why we will have to onboard the data source first. Then I'll add it to the related resource.

Identity: identityProps,
EnvironmentProperties: FlattenDynatraceEnvironmentProperties(props.DynatraceEnvironmentProperties),
PlanData: FlattenDynatracePlanData(props.PlanData),
UserInfo: FlattenDynatraceUserInfo(metadata.ResourceData.Get("user").([]interface{})),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is computed only, so we cannot "Get" it here, if this is not returned by the API, it cannot be included in the Data Source as it will always be empty.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will fix.

Comment on lines 158 to 162
first_name = "Alice"
last_name = "Bobab"
email = "[email protected]"
phone_number = "123456"
country = "westus"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why are we now supplying data directly here? This looks like it might actually be a real email (or could be in future?) Is this a mistake from local testing that should be removed?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Right, it was for local testing, will remove them.


---

A `user` block supports the following:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

and here

Suggested change
A `user` block supports the following:
A `user` block exports the following:

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will fix.


---

A `plan` block supports the following:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

same here

Suggested change
A `plan` block supports the following:
A `plan` block exports the following:

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will fix.


---

A `identity` block supports the following:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since this block is computed only, it's exports rather than supports.

Suggested change
A `identity` block supports the following:
An `identity` block exports the following:

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will fix.


A `identity` block supports the following:

* `type` - The type of identity used for the resource. Only possible value is `SystemAssigned`.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since this is computed only, we don't specify possible values.

Suggested change
* `type` - The type of identity used for the resource. Only possible value is `SystemAssigned`.
* `type` - The type of identity used for the resource.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will fix.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants