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

#338 - branch dan-fix-versions-upgrade - Fixed Provider bugs, TF upgrade. from v1.0.10 to v1.6.0 #338

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Nov 8, 2023

Conversation

danishkamili
Copy link
Collaborator

@danishkamili danishkamili commented Nov 7, 2023

Fixed Provider Bug for effective labels
[https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-google/issues/16217]

Upgraded Terraform version - removed dependency on optional experimental features
[https://developer.hashicorp.com/terraform/language/v1.3.x/upgrade-guides#concluding-the-optional-attributes-experiment]

Currently Tested and live in lab at -
terraform version
Terraform v1.6.0
on linux_amd64

Provider: >=3.50

Since, terraform version upgrade requires all the dependent files like root or child modules to be compatible, hence, doing small chunks for fixing provider bugs or upgrades didn't seem feasible, hence, a single PR for the both.

Modules touched mainly:

Cloudbuild
audit-bunker
landing-zone-bootstrap
logging-center
22-private-service-connect
All the
variable.tf which included experimental features
terraform.tf which had downgraded version as well optional feature

let me know if more information is needed or the testing on your end yields a different results or issues.

@danishkamili
Copy link
Collaborator Author

build-results

@danishkamili
Copy link
Collaborator Author

build-results-1

@danishkamili
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@obriensystems let me know if you want me to add more information to the PR, or test screen shots or results.

@danishkamili danishkamili changed the title Fixed Provider bugs, TF upgrade. from v1.0.10 to v1.6.0 #338 - branch dan-fix-versions-upgrade - Fixed Provider bugs, TF upgrade. from v1.0.10 to v1.6.0 Nov 7, 2023
@fmichaelobrien
Copy link
Contributor

The pr looks good.
I would merge as long as you have tested all 4 triggers (boot, common, nprod, prod) ideally in a new organization

Copy link
Contributor

@fmichaelobrien fmichaelobrien left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
I didn't do my own deploy of the pr - will queue it later

@danishkamili
Copy link
Collaborator Author

danishkamili commented Nov 7, 2023

@fmichaelobrien
tested all 4 triggers in an org with no existing LZ deployed, although it previously had LZ deployed, but everything was cleaned up prior to this test, should be ok, imo.

@fmichaelobrien
Copy link
Contributor

Very nice.

Let me know if you don't see the merge button - but I think you do.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants