-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.5k
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
NS1 Provider: Modeling ns1 metadata #13636
Comments
Hello – The issue #5694 is a frustrating one for sure. I'm not sure we have a complete solution for that yet. As a workaround, do you think you could define I wrote an example implementation in a "fake" resource here: Conceptually it's this: In summary, omitting the value will get you I think that should work here, but please let me know what you think! |
I'm going to close this for now. The crux of the issue is #5694, hopefully my idea above is a viable workaround. Thanks! |
@catsby Thanks for the detailed explanation/proposed solution! This looks like it will do the trick, as soon as i get time(should be in the next two weeks), i will try implementing it with the NS1 provider. Thanks again for the examples |
You're very welcome! Thanks for raising the issue, sorry that #5694 is still unresolved 😦 |
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 have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further. |
There has been a struggle to model NS1 record metadata within the ns1 provider. The crux of the problem has to do with the fact that ns1 metadata is used within nested objects of the record resource and that its important not to use default values when ns1 metadata fields are absent from the configuration.
Ideally, the ns1 record resource could contain nested
meta
schemas that represent ns1 metadata:I have tried "flattening" the ns1 metadata structure, but still run into the same issue of absent fields != default values for
answers
:There is an open issue addressing how to get
d.GetOk
to properly detect absence from config vs default values.Are there any suggestions for how to model nested schemas within a resource that need to differentiate between a field being absent and its default?
References
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: