New resource: aws_lightsail_domain_entry

[blckct]

Community Note

• Please vote on this pull request by adding a 👍 reaction to the original pull request comment to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
• Please do not leave "+1" comments, they generate extra noise for pull request followers and do not help prioritize the request

Add new resource aws_lightsail_domain_entry
Closes #2731

Release note for CHANGELOG:

aws/lightsail_domain_entry: New resource

Output from acceptance testing:

make testacc TEST=./aws TESTARGS='-run=TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_basic'
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./aws -v -parallel 20 -run=TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_basic -timeout 120m
=== RUN   TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_basic
=== CONT  TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_basic
--- PASS: TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_basic (33.33s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/aws	33.357s

make testacc TEST=./aws TESTARGS='-run=TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_disappears'
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./aws -v -parallel 20 -run=TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_disappears -timeout 120m
=== RUN   TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_disappears
=== PAUSE TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_disappears
=== CONT  TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_disappears
--- PASS: TestAccAWSLightsailDomainEntry_disappears (31.78s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/aws	31.807s
...

[blckct]

I had some trouble wrapping my head around the tests so please take extra care with them 😟
Regarding the #9080, the provider has to be hardcoded in tests same as in aws_lightsail_domain

[blckct]

@aeschright Hey, any chance that someone could look at this PR?

[teamterraform]

Notification of Recent and Upcoming Changes to Contributions

Thank you for this contribution! There have been a few recent development changes that affect this pull request. We apologize for the inconvenience, especially if there have been long review delays up until now. Please note that this is automated message from an unmonitored account. See the FAQ for additional information on the maintainer team and review prioritization.

If you are unable to complete these updates, please leave a comment for the community and maintainers so someone can potentially continue the work. The maintainers will encourage other contributors to use the existing contribution as the base for additional changes as appropriate. Otherwise, contributions that do not receive updated code or comments from the original contributor may be closed in the future so the maintainers can focus on active items.

For the most up to date information about Terraform AWS Provider development, see the Contributing Guide. Additional technical debt changes can be tracked with the technical-debt label on issues.

As part of updating a pull request with these changes, the most current unit testing and linting will run. These may report issues that were not previously reported.

Action Required: Terraform 0.12 Syntax

Reference: #8950
Reference: #14417

Version 3 and later of the Terraform AWS Provider, which all existing contributions would potentially be added, only supports Terraform 0.12 and later. Certain syntax elements of Terraform 0.11 and earlier show deprecation warnings during runs with Terraform 0.12. Documentation and test configurations, such as those including deprecated string interpolations (some_attribute = "${aws_service_thing.example.id}") should be updated to the newer syntax (some_attribute = aws_service_thing.example.id). Contribution testing will automatically fail on older syntax in the near future. Please see the referenced issues for additional information.

Action Required: Terraform Plugin SDK Version 2

Reference: #14551

The Terraform AWS Provider has been upgraded to the latest version of the Terraform Plugin SDK. Generally, most changes to contributions should only involve updating Go import paths in source code files. Please see the referenced issue for additional information.

Action Required: Removal of website/aws.erb File

Reference: #14712

Any changes to the website/aws.erb file are no longer necessary and should be removed from this contribution to prevent merge issues in the near future when the file is removed from the repository. Please see the referenced issue for additional information.

Upcoming Change of Git Branch Naming

Reference: #14292

Development environments will need their upstream Git branch updated from master to main in the near future. Please see the referenced issue for additional information and scheduling.

Upcoming Change of GitHub Organization

Reference: #14715

This repository will be migrating from https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws to https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws. No practitioner or developer action is anticipated and most GitHub functionality will automatically redirect to the new location. Go import paths including terraform-providers can remain for now. Please see the referenced issue for additional information and scheduling.

[blckct]

Regarding the automated message, I'm willing to make the changes but I'd prefer if someone from the team confirmed this feature is needed.

[reticentnz]

is there an update on this? I've been playing around with Lightsail deployments but it's somewhat limited without being to provision the DNS records alongside the creation of the lightsail instance itself.

[zhelding]

Pull request #21306 has significantly refactored the AWS Provider codebase. As a result, most PRs opened prior to the refactor now have merge conflicts that must be resolved before proceeding.

Specifically, PR #21306 relocated the code for all AWS resources and data sources from a single aws directory to a large number of separate directories in internal/service, each corresponding to a particular AWS service. This separation of code has also allowed for us to simplify the names of underlying functions -- while still avoiding namespace collisions.

We recognize that many pull requests have been open for some time without yet being addressed by our maintainers. Therefore, we want to make it clear that resolving these conflicts in no way affects the prioritization of a particular pull request. Once a pull request has been prioritized for review, the necessary changes will be made by a maintainer -- either directly or in collaboration with the pull request author.

For a more complete description of this refactor, including examples of how old filepaths and function names correspond to their new counterparts: please refer to issue #20000.

For a quick guide on how to amend your pull request to resolve the merge conflicts resulting from this refactor and bring it in line with our new code patterns: please refer to our Service Package Refactor Pull Request Guide.

[brittandeyoung]

@reticentnz

For Awareness I have begun work on creating a separate AWS lightsail provider in order to help with Speeding up contributions and to give it dedicated attention.

The Github repo is located here: https://github.com/DeYoungTech/terraform-provider-awslightsail

The provider and documentation is published here: https://registry.terraform.io/providers/DeYoungTech/awslightsail/latest

With the most recent version, the provider has moved past feature parity for lightsail services and I have added support for the domain_entry resource.

If you want to start using this resource now, feel free to check it out and provide feedback.

[brittandeyoung]

@blckct If I where to put in the time to make a Pull request against your branch to bring this change up to date, would you be available to merge it?

[blckct]

@brittandeyoung Hey, yes. I could even update it myself if I knew there's a chance it will be merged.

[brittandeyoung]

@blckct I have opened a Pull request against the branch you have created this PR from: blckct#2

Merging this should bring this PR up to speed with the newest changes from main. I attempted to run all the validations I could locally, so hopefully we will have passing tests the first try =). If not, I will raise additional PRs to resolve.

Once we have passing tests I will see who I can bug to get a review =).

passing local tests of refactor:

➜ terraform-provider-aws (aws_lightsail_domain_entry) ✔ make testacc TESTARGS='-run=TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_' PKG=lightsail ACCTEST_PARALLELISM=2
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./internal/service/lightsail/... -v -count 1 -parallel 2  -run=TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_ -timeout 180m
=== RUN   TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_basic
=== RUN   TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_disappears
=== PAUSE TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_disappears
=== CONT  TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_basic
=== CONT  TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_disappears
--- PASS: TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_disappears (34.94s)
--- PASS: TestAccLightsailDomainEntry_basic (36.92s)
PASS
ok      github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/internal/service/lightsail  38.872s

[brittandeyoung]

After speaking with provider maintainers, I have been recommended to open up a new PR and pull in the commits from this PR.

[github-actions]

This functionality has been released in v4.36.0 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. Thank you!

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.