tests/resource/aws_ecs_service: TestAccAWSEcsService_withMultipleTargetGroups Consistently Failing

[bflad]

Community Note

• Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
• Please do not leave "+1" or other comments that do not add relevant new information or questions, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
• If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

Description

Currently there is a consistently failing test:

=== CONT  TestAccAWSEcsService_withMultipleTargetGroups
TestAccAWSEcsService_withMultipleTargetGroups: testing.go:684: Step 0 error: config is invalid: 2 problems:
- Unsupported argument: An argument named "field" is not expected here.
- Unsupported argument: An argument named "values" is not expected here.

These two arguments were deprecated with replacements awhile ago but this test configuration was not updated. With the recent removal of the arguments, this test is now failing. Updating the test configuration to use the new configuration blocks should fix the test.

New or Affected Resource(s)

• aws_ecs_service

Definition of Done

• TestAccAWSEcsService_withMultipleTargetGroups testing passes

References

• Version 3 Upgrade Guide section on aws_lb_listener_rule Resource
• Example test fixes in other places
• Contributing Guide on Running/Writing Acceptance Testing

[ghost]

This has been released in version 3.2.0 of the Terraform AWS provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading.

For further feature requests or bug reports with this functionality, please create a new GitHub issue following the template for triage. Thanks!

[ghost]

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. Thanks!