Initial implementation for resource identity #278
Conversation
…th resource to UpgradeResourceIdentity tests so they can lookup the right server for that rpc
ansgarm
force-pushed
the
rk/resource-identity
branch
from
2c093b3 to
6655aba
Compare
ansgarm
force-pushed
the
rk/resource-identity
branch
from
6655aba to
472731f
Compare
…ResourceIdentityResponse to GetResourceIdentitySchemasResponse
…lint to silence go-linter
rainkwan
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I left some comments on the v5 stuff (skipped v6 since it's likely the same feedback).
Main thing to consider is potentially just using the existing resource routing over introducing a new resource identity routing.
Also if you'd like to add the changelogs now that's cool! (or a follow-up PR)
| //nolint:staticcheck // Intentionally verifying interface implementation | ||
| func (s *TestServer) ProviderServerWithResourceIdentity() tfprotov6.ProviderServerWithResourceIdentity { | ||
| return s | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can remove this after initial development, since we know the interface is going to disappear soon (and we're not actually using it here) 👍🏻
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So I suppose we should add a todo comment to remove this? Or would you remove this even before this PR is merged?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah my point is that the PR doesn't need it at all. (similar to what we did with SDKv2 this morning in our 1/1)
It's useful to generate the initial methods, then we can remove it since it's not actually required.
|
|
||
| //nolint:staticcheck // Intentionally verifying interface implementation | ||
| func (s *TestServer) ProviderServerWithResourceIdentity() tfprotov5.ProviderServerWithResourceIdentity { | ||
| return s | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can remove this after initial development, since we know the interface is going to disappear soon (and we're not actually using it here) 👍🏻
|
I created two issues and added them to our milestones to cleanup the assertions after the next release 👍🏻 |
ansgarm
force-pushed
the
rk/resource-identity
branch
from
656dec9 to
5ecec55
Compare
…e identity to be implemented by the same server, so we'll always follow resources
ansgarm
force-pushed
the
rk/resource-identity
branch
from
5ecec55 to
4c31d1f
Compare
Adds the new request fields and response fields to support resource identity in mux including RPCs
GetResourceIdentitySchemasandUpgradeResourceIdentity.Plugin-Go: Reference: hashicorp/terraform-plugin-go#476
TODO:
Later TODO:
ProviderServerWithResourceIdentityback toProviderServer