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
feat!: Simplify use of the all_ports argument #132
feat!: Simplify use of the all_ports argument #132
Conversation
Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information. For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request. |
/gcbrun |
/gcbrun |
@colereynolds since we are changing default behavior it has to be a breaking change. Can you plz add a document mentioning this behavior change in doc folder? use this doc as example. Create one for version 6.0. |
@colereynolds r u still working on this? |
@imrannayer Yes, I haven't forgotten about this. I have been in a very busy season but things are getting back to normal. I will make time to do this sometime this week. |
Updated Upgrading section to include new doc
Mentioning the exclusivity between ports and all_ports in variable descriptions
Added upgrade doc for v6
Update variable descriptions to mention mutual exclusivity of port and all_ports arguments
Update usage example with a working example
Update variable descriptions
Removing range from ports argument description as it's misleading
@imrannayer - Give this another look when you get a few. I made a few tweaks to update the README too. |
…0.md Include minor version in file name
/gcbrun |
/gcbrun |
Today, the
ports
argument is required and no mention of exclusivity between theports
andall_ports
argument is mentioned in the variable description or Terraform Registry docs for this module. If someone wants to use theall_ports
argument, they have to go through a process of trial and error to figure out what value to pass to theports
argument in order to successfully deploy the forwarding rule. I'm proposing to make theports
argument optional and set the default value tonull
, which is the only value the backend API will accept to deploy the forwarding rule whenall_ports
is set totrue
.I can't find where to update the Terraform Registry docs for this module. Adding more detail around the mutual exclusivity of the
ports
andall_ports
arguments[1] would help users understand that only one of the two should be used, if someone could make time to create an issue for that, please.[1] https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/google/latest/docs/resources/compute_forwarding_rule.html#all_ports