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

Route resource's priority parameter should be optional #1009

Closed
jphalip opened this issue Jan 25, 2018 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1015
Closed

Route resource's priority parameter should be optional #1009

jphalip opened this issue Jan 25, 2018 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1015

Comments

@jphalip
Copy link
Contributor

jphalip commented Jan 25, 2018

Terraform Version

  • Terraform v0.11.2
  • provider.google v1.5.0

Affected Resource(s)

  • google_compute_route

Debug Output

Error: google_compute_route.my_route: "priority": required field is not set

Expected Behavior

The route priority should be optional and default to 1000, similarly to the "gcloud" command counterpart.

Actual Behavior

The route resource requires you to provide a priority.

@albertomurillo
Copy link

I just faced this. Will you work on a PR?

jphalip added a commit to jphalip/terraform-provider-google that referenced this issue Jan 27, 2018
modular-magician added a commit to modular-magician/terraform-provider-google that referenced this issue Sep 27, 2019
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 29, 2020

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. If you feel I made an error 🤖 🙉 , please reach out to my human friends 👉 [email protected]. Thanks!

@ghost ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 29, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants