Skip to content
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

r/virtual_machine: support for setting license_type to None #5290

Closed
tombuildsstuff opened this issue Jan 2, 2020 · 4 comments
Closed

r/virtual_machine: support for setting license_type to None #5290

tombuildsstuff opened this issue Jan 2, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@tombuildsstuff
Copy link
Contributor

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 "me too" comments, 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

Allow configuring the license_type property of the Virtual Machine resource(s) to None in addition to Windows_Client and Windows_Server.

@NilsBusche looked to introduce support for this in the existing azurerm_virtual_machine resource in #5064 - however since this resource is being superseded in 2.0 this Pull Request was ultimately closed; instead this issue looks to track support for this in the replacement azurerm_linux_virtual_machine and azurerm_windows_virtual_machine resources.

New or Affected Resource(s)

  • azurerm_linux_virtual_machine
  • azurerm_windows_virtual_machine

References

@tombuildsstuff
Copy link
Contributor Author

hi @NilsBusche

We're currently working on version 2.0 of the Azure Provider which we previously announced in #2807.

As a part of this we're introducing five new resources which will supersede the existing azurerm_virtual_machine and azurerm_virtual_machine_scale_set resources:

  • azurerm_linux_virtual_machine
  • azurerm_linux_virtual_machine_scale_set
  • azurerm_virtual_machine_scale_set_extension
  • azurerm_windows_virtual_machine
  • azurerm_windows_virtual_machine_scale_set

We recently opened #5550 which adds support for the new Virtual Machine resources - and I'm able to confirm that this is supported in the new Virtual Machine resources - however unfortunately we have no plans to backport this to the existing azurerm_virtual_machine resource.

In order to get feedback on these new resources we'll be launching support for these new resources as an opt-in Beta in an upcoming 1.x release of the Azure Provider and ultimately release these as "GA" in the upcoming 2.0 release. We'll post an update in #2807 when both the opt-in Beta (1.x) & GA (2.0) are available - as such I'd recommend subscribing to that issue for updates.

This issue's been assigned to the milestone "2.0" since this is where this will ship - however (due to the way that closing Github Issues from PR's works, to be able to track this back for future users) this issue will be closed once the first of the new resources have been merged.

Thanks!

@tombuildsstuff
Copy link
Contributor Author

hey @NilsBusche

As mentioned above support for this is available in the new azurerm_linux_virtual_machine, azurerm_windows_virtual_machine, azurerm_linux_virtual_machine_scale_set, azurerm_windows_virtual_machine_scale_set resources which are available in version 1.43 of the Azure Provider by opting into the Beta.

Since support for this is now available via the opt-in Beta I'm going to close this issue for the moment - but these new resources will be going GA in version 2.0 of the Azure Provider in the coming weeks - we'll post an update in #2807 when that's available.

Thanks!

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Feb 24, 2020

This has been released in version 2.0.0 of the provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading. As an example:

provider "azurerm" {
    version = "~> 2.0.0"
}
# ... other configuration ...

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 6, 2020

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. If you feel I made an error 🤖 🙉 , please reach out to my human friends 👉 hashibot-feedback@hashicorp.com. Thanks!

@ghost ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 6, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant