You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have a project that uses the terraform_remote_state resource. When bootstrapping the project, however, the remote state file that it targets doesn't exist. I've added defaults to the resource to work against this, however Terraform still complains with Error: Unable to find remote state.
Attempted Solutions
During the bootstrapping project, I currently comment out the terraform_remote_state resource, and then replace all of the resource interpolations with the defaults values directly. This works, but is a little cumbersome.
Proposal
My original intuition with terraform_remote_state was that the defaults would apply, even if the remote state file didn't exist. If this was possible, I think it would make this workflow much smoother!
References
As far as I know, there aren't any related GitHub issues.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I wonder if it is possible to add a fail_silently variable so this doesn't remain toil for anyone who wants to leverage coming state in larger terraform repositories. Similarly to how try and can work.
Current Terraform Version
Use-cases
I have a project that uses the
terraform_remote_state
resource. When bootstrapping the project, however, the remote state file that it targets doesn't exist. I've addeddefaults
to the resource to work against this, however Terraform still complains withError: Unable to find remote state
.Attempted Solutions
During the bootstrapping project, I currently comment out the
terraform_remote_state
resource, and then replace all of the resource interpolations with thedefaults
values directly. This works, but is a little cumbersome.Proposal
My original intuition with
terraform_remote_state
was that thedefaults
would apply, even if the remote state file didn't exist. If this was possible, I think it would make this workflow much smoother!References
As far as I know, there aren't any related GitHub issues.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: