feat: Password policy resource

[sfc-gh-ngaberel]

Add support for the Password policy resource.
Fixes #1581

Test Plan

• acceptance tests

• password policy builder unit tests

[github-actions]

Integration tests failure for 5f86cbf8e2b9c6325c750af6b11f90e3ff79e5b2

[github-actions]

Integration tests failure for a04f2741706a16397623e9b87aa9af5ba67605ea

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for ce5cb24749cf2a64acb2c0335073d95aacd3b696

[sfc-gh-swinkler]

some of this reflection stuff is fairly complex. can we have tests for all these helper functions?

[sfc-gh-swinkler]

this should really be an Enum, since there is a fixed quantity of entityTypes. Also entity isnt really the correct word, its actually "object" We have account level, database level, schema level objects.

[github-actions]

🚫 [golangci] _{reported by reviewdog 🐶}
File is not gofumpt-ed (gofumpt)

[sfc-gh-swinkler]

is there a way to automatically run gofumpt whenever a PR is made? this is a really annoying error message

[sfc-gh-ngaberel]

Yes, I'll add that with the vscode config changes.

[github-actions]

Integration tests failure for 6dbd13d41b226730010aec3ab55da4693bf7d4cc

[github-actions]

Integration tests failure for 81121084487a082aecf6d6db412fcd62200428a4

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for 918ef6056cf8cf47b4d5ba168637a349245fb11e

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for 7edc7c7caf36e8d24a7cb85186d768fd822fa9bd

[sfc-gh-swinkler]

the word "manager" is not very descriptiive or useful. What i was thinking is that we could have a Client struct that has references to each object API. e.g.

type Client struct {
	conn *sql.DB

	Users           Users
	Roles           Roles
	Warehouses      Warehouses
	Databases       Databases
	Schemas         Schemas
	Tables          Tables
	NetworkPolicies NetworkPolicies
}

where Roles for example would be:

// Roles describes all the roles related methods that the
// Snowflake API supports.
type Roles interface {
	// List all the roles by pattern.
	List(ctx context.Context, options RoleListOptions) ([]*Role, error)
	// Create a new role with the given options.
	Create(ctx context.Context, options RoleCreateOptions) (*Role, error)
	// Read an role by its name.
	Read(ctx context.Context, role string) (*Role, error)
	// Update attributes of an existing role.
	Update(ctx context.Context, role string, options RoleUpdateOptions) (*Role, error)
	// Delete a role by its name.
	Delete(ctx context.Context, role string) error
	// Rename a role name.
	Rename(ctx context.Context, old string, new string) error
}

then you could reference password policeis as: client.PasswordPolicies.Create(<CreatePasswordPolicyInput>)

I also think addtion a validation method to the input would be useful. Example:

// RoleCreateOptions represents the options for creating a role.
type RoleCreateOptions struct {
	*RoleProperties

	// Required: Identifier for the role; must be unique for your account.
	Name string
}

func (o RoleCreateOptions) validate() error {
	if o.Name == "" {
		return errors.New("name must not be empty")
	}
	return nil
}

then you could validate input before doing generic request as so:

func (r *roles) List(ctx context.Context, options RoleListOptions) ([]*Role, error) {
	if err := options.validate(); err != nil {
		return nil, fmt.Errorf("validate list options: %w", err)
	}
...

[sfc-gh-swinkler]

still not fond of having this db.Exec right here. Would be better to put this logic in the client struct (see earlier comment)

[sfc-gh-swinkler]

a lot of resources share the same kind of ID format. This could probably be abstracted. Also i am not sure it needs to accept the whole PasswordPolicy reference, it really just needs the schema object identifier.

[sfc-gh-swinkler]

is there a way to automatically run gofumpt whenever a PR is made? this is a really annoying error message

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for 906a067f31363477bd3c22421a811676d2b813ac

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for f8ea30aa45ef179a82503452d2ff4e88fe18c30d

[sfc-gh-swinkler]

i really don't like this way of registering functions with the password policy manager. i am sure there is a better way to do this.