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 Resource: azurerm_video_indexer_account #27632

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Oct 23, 2024
Merged

New Resource: azurerm_video_indexer_account #27632

merged 8 commits into from
Oct 23, 2024

Conversation

mbfrahry
Copy link
Member

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

This PR adds azurerm_video_indexer_account as a new resource.

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.

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.

  • New Resource: azurerm_video_indexer_account [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

@stephybun stephybun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @mbfrahry! Could you take a look at the comments I left in-line?

@@ -4113,7 +4113,7 @@ resource "azurerm_key_vault" "test" {

secret_permissions = [
"Get",
"List",
"List", l
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Accident? :o

}

type StorageModel struct {
StorageAccountId string `tfschema:"storage_account_id"`
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this just be named account_id since it's already under a storage block?

if response.WasNotFound(account.HttpResponse) {
return metadata.MarkAsGone(id)
}
return fmt.Errorf("reading %s: %+v", id, err)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
return fmt.Errorf("reading %s: %+v", id, err)
return fmt.Errorf("retrieving %s: %+v", id, err)

Comment on lines 235 to 245
id, err := accounts.ParseAccountID(metadata.ResourceData.Id())
if err != nil {
return err
}

client := metadata.Client.VideoIndexer.AccountClient
metadata.Logger.Infof("deleting %s", id)

if _, err := client.Delete(ctx, *id); err != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("deleting %s: %v", id, err)
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Really minor, but the ordering of this looks strange to me. Don't we usually define the client first then begin parsing IDs?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good shout! That does look weird

Comment on lines 279 to 280
StorageAccountId: pointer.From(input.ResourceId),
UserAssignedIdentityId: pointer.From(input.UserAssignedIdentity),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should parse the resource IDs that are returned by the API before setting them into state so that we can catch any casing inconsistencies

Comment on lines 93 to 101
if response.WasNotFound(resp.HttpResponse) {
return utils.Bool(false), nil
}
return nil, fmt.Errorf("retreiving %s: %v", id, err)
}
if response.WasNotFound(resp.HttpResponse) {
return utils.Bool(false), nil
}
return utils.Bool(true), nil
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not sure why we might need to specifically check for a 404 status, any error that we get from the API when running the tests and checking that it exists is logically a false, so I think this can be simplified. Let me know if that makes sense or if I've not considered something.

Suggested change
if response.WasNotFound(resp.HttpResponse) {
return utils.Bool(false), nil
}
return nil, fmt.Errorf("retreiving %s: %v", id, err)
}
if response.WasNotFound(resp.HttpResponse) {
return utils.Bool(false), nil
}
return utils.Bool(true), nil
return nil, fmt.Errorf("retrieving %s: %v", id, err)
}
return pointer.To(true), nil

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nah, you're right. Copy pasta strikes again


data.ResourceTest(t, r, []acceptance.TestStep{
{
Config: r.basic(data),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this be using

Suggested change
Config: r.basic(data),
Config: r.userAssignedIdentity(data),

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ooo yep yep. Ty ty

Copy link
Member

@stephybun stephybun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @mbfrahry LGTM 👍

@stephybun stephybun merged commit e3fd32d into main Oct 23, 2024
34 checks passed
@stephybun stephybun deleted the f-video-indexer branch October 23, 2024 13:32
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v4.7.0 milestone Oct 23, 2024
stephybun added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 23, 2024
Copy link

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 25, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants