New Resource: azurerm_role_assignment_marketplace

[ms-zhenhua]

Description

fix #18387
extract marketplace role assignment out from azurerm_role_assignment into azurerm_role_assignment_marketplace according to the comments in #18439

Test Result

--- PASS: TestAccRoleAssignmentMarketplace_roleName (67.14s)
--- PASS: TestAccRoleAssignmentMarketplace_requiresImport (59.19s)
--- PASS: TestAccRoleAssignmentMarketplace_emptyName (65.38s)
--- PASS: TestAccRoleAssignmentMarketplace_builtin (65.48s)
--- PASS: TestAccRoleAssignmentMarketplace_ServicePrincipalWithType (69.34s)
--- PASS: TestAccRoleAssignmentMarketplace_ServicePrincipalGroup (90.93s)
--- PASS: TestAccRoleAssignmentMarketplace_ServicePrincipal (93.24s)
PASS
ok github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-azurerm/internal/services/authorization 234.346s

[magodo]

Thanks for this PR!
I've taken a look through and left some comments inline. The main concern is that other than Marketplace scope, does there any other un-regular scope exist need to be supported in the future?

[ms-zhenhua]

Hi @magodo, thank you for your review. I have resolved the comments. Kindly take another review.
And your concern is reasonable. However, since the provider will validate the scope, it seems hard to support new similar resources without changing the provider.

[magodo]

Thank you for all the updates! This now LGTM 👍

[stephybun]

Thanks for splitting this out @ms-zhenhua.

Unfortunately I think some information was glossed over when we closed #18439. While it's correct to split this out - this should be refactored into a base resource (since the arguments are practically identical across the different role assignment types) - we reference the policy assignment resources in this comment as an example.

Does that make sense?

[stephybun]

Can we use go-azure-sdk here?

[ms-zhenhua]

Thanks for splitting this out @ms-zhenhua.

Unfortunately I think some information was glossed over when we closed #18439. While it's correct to split this out - this should be refactored into a base resource (since the arguments are practically identical across the different role assignment types) - we reference the policy assignment resources in this comment as an example.

Does that make sense?

Hi @stephybun, thank you for clarifying. I think I misunderstood the meaning of this comment😭. For now, I think there are 2 ways to go on:

1. Continue with PR 18439 to extract a new azurerm_role_assignment_marketplace, but to extract a common base resource, we need to keep using untyped format and azure-sdk as azurerm_role_assignment for this new resouce. After this issue is fixed, we can create a new PR to refactor both resources to typed resources and use go-azure-sdk later.
2. First create a new PR to refactor azurerm_role_assignment to use typed resource and go-azure-sdk, then create a new azurerm_role_assignment_marketplace resource to fix this issue.

I prefer to the #1 way to first resolve this issue. WDYT?

[ms-zhenhua]

Close this PR and will create a new PR using go-azure-sdk

[github-actions]

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.