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

Add desired_status argument to google_compute_instance #3154

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 21, 2020

Conversation

rileykarson
Copy link
Member

Upstreams hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#4797

hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#4797 (comment) is probably a helpful reference for behaviour. Tests have been changed a little since they made the table, but they roughly match.

I applied some docs changes during the (manual) upstreaming, since the script didn't like doing that many commits. They'll get applied by the Magician during the sync.

Release Note Template for Downstream PRs (will be copied)

compute: added the ability to manage the status of `google_compute_instance` resources with the `desired_status` field

@rileykarson rileykarson requested a review from chrisst February 20, 2020 23:05
@googlebot
Copy link

We found a Contributor License Agreement for you (the sender of this pull request), but were unable to find agreements for all the commit author(s) or Co-authors. If you authored these, maybe you used a different email address in the git commits than was used to sign the CLA (login here to double check)? If these were authored by someone else, then they will need to sign a CLA as well, and confirm that they're okay with these being contributed to Google.
In order to pass this check, please resolve this problem and then comment @googlebot I fixed it.. If the bot doesn't comment, it means it doesn't think anything has changed.

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

@rileykarson
Copy link
Member Author

No CLA is required, as this change is to a third_party directory where the CLA does not apply.

@googlebot
Copy link

A Googler has manually verified that the CLAs look good.

(Googler, please make sure the reason for overriding the CLA status is clearly documented in these comments.)

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

@modular-magician
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi! I'm the modular magician. Your PR generated some diffs in downstreams - here they are.

Diff report:

Terraform GA: Diff ( 3 files changed, 837 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-))
Terraform Beta: Diff ( 3 files changed, 837 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-))

@googlebot
Copy link

We found a Contributor License Agreement for you (the sender of this pull request), but were unable to find agreements for all the commit author(s) or Co-authors. If you authored these, maybe you used a different email address in the git commits than was used to sign the CLA (login here to double check)? If these were authored by someone else, then they will need to sign a CLA as well, and confirm that they're okay with these being contributed to Google.
In order to pass this check, please resolve this problem and then comment @googlebot I fixed it.. If the bot doesn't comment, it means it doesn't think anything has changed.

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

@googlebot
Copy link

A Googler has manually verified that the CLAs look good.

(Googler, please make sure the reason for overriding the CLA status is clearly documented in these comments.)

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

@modular-magician
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi! I'm the modular magician. Your PR generated some diffs in downstreams - here they are.

Diff report:

Terraform GA: Diff ( 3 files changed, 832 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-))
Terraform Beta: Diff ( 3 files changed, 832 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-))

@rileykarson rileykarson merged commit bd3a6b7 into GoogleCloudPlatform:master Feb 21, 2020
nathkn pushed a commit to nathkn/magic-modules that referenced this pull request May 18, 2020
…atform#3154)

* Add desired_status argument to google_compute_instance

* Fix network naming to match MM@HEAD

Co-authored-by: norbjd <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants