You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
Please do not leave "+1" or "me too" comments, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment. If the issue is assigned to the "modular-magician" user, it is either in the process of being autogenerated, or is planned to be autogenerated soon. If the issue is assigned to a user, that user is claiming responsibility for the issue. If the issue is assigned to "hashibot", a community member has claimed the issue already.
Description
Currently google terraform provider give us 3 kinds of resources for managing IAMs:
iam_member 1 user -> 1 role (non authoritative)
iam_binding many users -> 1 role (authoritative for given role scope)
iam_policy - many roles -> many users (but in form of list of iam_bindings, authoritative for whole IAM policy for given resource)
I would like to have option for having this mappings also:
1 user -> many roles (authoritative for given user scope/ or non authoritative also)
many users - many roles (non authoritative)
It would make terraform config more readable and maintainable. Currently if we have many users which should have many roles assigned and we want to allow to manually maintain another iams, then we have to use a lot of iam_member resources. It produces big and not readable config file.
New or Affected Resource(s)
google_*_iam_member (allowing to specify more than one role)
google_*_iam_binding (allowing non authoritative version or allowing to specify more than one role)
Since our binding/role resources are split up specifically to make breaking down of IAM policies easier, is there a reason you don't want to use count (available before 0.12) or foreach (0.12+)?
Sorry for the late answer. No, I have nothing against using foreach. At that time I was aware only about count which have some disadvantages. Currently using foreach construction is enough for me. Thanks.
It sounds like this got resolved, so I'm going to close it out. If this is still something people are looking for, feel free to open a new issue. Thanks!
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
locked and limited conversation to collaborators
Mar 28, 2020
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Community Note
Description
Currently google terraform provider give us 3 kinds of resources for managing IAMs:
I would like to have option for having this mappings also:
It would make terraform config more readable and maintainable. Currently if we have many users which should have many roles assigned and we want to allow to manually maintain another iams, then we have to use a lot of iam_member resources. It produces big and not readable config file.
New or Affected Resource(s)
Potential Terraform Configuration
References
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: