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

azurerm_automation_runbook - add support for create runbook as draft and then publish #6813

Merged
merged 2 commits into from May 7, 2020

Conversation

njuCZ
Copy link
Contributor

@njuCZ njuCZ commented May 7, 2020

according to https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/master/specification/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2015-10-31/examples/createRunbookAsDraft.json, we could create runbook with no publish_content_link

this PR add supports for it. This is also the same experience with the portal

Additionally, I think exposing publish_content_link is a little confusing for users, and it tends to reports wield error. I wonder Could we make it deprecated and removed in next version ?

relevant issues:
#6588
#4403
#3086

image

@njuCZ njuCZ changed the title add support for create runbook as draft and then publish add support for create runbook as draft and then publish - azurerm_automation_runbook May 7, 2020
Copy link
Member

@mbfrahry mbfrahry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hey @njuCZ, thanks for taking the time to dig into this issue. The changes look good to me and it'll unlock quite a few people. I'm not too familiar with this resource and publish_content_link so I'm hesitant to say we should deprecate and remove that field. I'd add a note to investigate further whether or not it makes sense to remove it especially because it's still a valid option to pass to the API and we don't want to take it away from people who are successfully using it

…ce.go

Co-authored-by: Matthew Frahry <mbfrahry@gmail.com>
@katbyte katbyte changed the title add support for create runbook as draft and then publish - azurerm_automation_runbook azurerm_automation_runbook - add support for create runbook as draft and then publish May 7, 2020
@katbyte katbyte added this to the v2.9.0 milestone May 7, 2020
Copy link
Collaborator

@katbyte katbyte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@njuCZ - LGTM after commit that change.

as for removing publish_content_link i don't think we should either. However maybe we should rename it i another PR to something that makes more sense?

@katbyte katbyte added bug and removed enhancement labels May 7, 2020
@katbyte katbyte changed the title azurerm_automation_runbook - add support for create runbook as draft and then publish azurerm_automation_runbook - add support for create runbook as draft and then publish May 7, 2020
@katbyte katbyte merged commit 090deae into hashicorp:master May 7, 2020
katbyte added a commit that referenced this pull request May 7, 2020
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 8, 2020

This has been released in version 2.9.0 of the provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading. As an example:

provider "azurerm" {
    version = "~> 2.9.0"
}
# ... other configuration ...

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jun 7, 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 👉 hashibot-feedback@hashicorp.com. Thanks!

@hashicorp hashicorp locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 7, 2020
@njuCZ njuCZ deleted the runbook branch June 9, 2020 04:56
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants