Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Remove CodePipeline GitHub environment variable #14175
Remove CodePipeline GitHub environment variable #14175
Changes from all commits
48083f3
0468506
2b2a2d1
857c35d
1e90b47
438deca
22e5d58
fa9628f
2f0704c
c2e885f
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We are actively in the process of removing the few other instances of hashed state storage, however Terraform in general doesn't handle
TypeMap
andSensitive: true
in a meaningful way without making the entire map sensitive, if I remember correctly. 😖It would be a bummer to introduce this technical debt in, but otherwise we could also be forced down the road of what I think you were suggesting the other day of potentially going against the API design slightly and implementing bespoke Terraform schema so we can control it better (and in this situation, actually implement a single sensitive attribute). We do have some slight precedence of this class of user experience enhancement with resources like
aws_sns_platform_application
and I believeaws_sns_topic
.I think this leaves us in a tough spot. 🙁 We can try to quickly design something better for this situation to squeeze it in for this major release in the next two weeks, which is fairly risky in my opinion, or punt on this for now and spend later cycles on this issue in general (potentially changing the Core/SDK sensitive map abilities and/or ensuring we get good feedback on a new resource design). What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the environment variable is a huge pain-point for practitioners, and waiting until 4.0 to remove it would be less than ideal. If we don't want to hash the value, would setting the
TypeMap
toSensitive
be a better option at this point? And then we could come up with a better solution.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Our potential path forward will be:
configuration
attributeSensitive: true
andComputed: true
github
/github_configuration
configuration block so we can properly show a difference with only theoauth
attribute sensitiveThese will require apply-time validation to ensure they aren't both defined since
ConflictsWith
does not support relative references. The other configuration blocks will need to be filled in later due to time. The documentation and upgrade guide should recommend using the new configuration block(s) over the map.