fix invalid provider configuration

[megan07]

Fixes hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#9237

Basically, passing in a computed value to the provider definition is illegal, so i had to rip out all the setup configuration and just do that in the SDK, before the tests were run.

If this PR is for Terraform, I acknowledge that I have:

• Searched through the issue tracker for an open issue that this either resolves or contributes to, commented on it to claim it, and written "fixes {url}" or "part of {url}" in this PR description. If there were no relevant open issues, I opened one and commented that I would like to work on it (not necessary for very small changes).
• Generated Terraform, and ran make test and make lint to ensure it passes unit and linter tests.
• Ensured that all new fields I added that can be set by a user appear in at least one example (for generated resources) or third_party test (for handwritten resources or update tests).
• Ran relevant acceptance tests (If the acceptance tests do not yet pass or you are unable to run them, please let your reviewer know).
• Read the Release Notes Guide before writing my release note below.

Release Note Template for Downstream PRs (will be copied)

[modular-magician]

Hi! I'm the modular magician. Your PR generated some diffs in downstreams - here they are.

Diff report:

Terraform GA: Diff ( 1 file changed, 225 insertions(+), 173 deletions(-))
Terraform Beta: Diff ( 2 files changed, 243 insertions(+), 191 deletions(-))

[modular-magician]

I have triggered VCR tests in RECORDING mode for the following tests that failed during VCR: TestAccDatasourceGoogleServiceNetworkingPeeredDnsDomain_basic|TestAccApigeeEnvironmentIamBindingGenerated|TestAccApigeeEnvironmentIamMemberGenerated|TestAccApigeeEnvironmentIamPolicyGenerated|TestAccCloudbuildWorkerPool_basic|TestAccContainerNodePool_withInvalidUpgradeSettings|TestAccServiceNetworkingPeeredDNSDomain_basic You can view the result here: https://ci-oss.hashicorp.engineering/viewQueued.html?itemId=241919

[slevenick]

Why is passing a computed value to a provider invalid? We have seen similar issues trying to set up the Kubernetes provider with input from a GKE cluster (or something like that) but it seems like it generally works if you create the GKE cluster first so the computed values aren't unknown.

Is there a possibility in the future of the TF dependency graph including providers so that this workflow can be possible?

[megan07]

@slevenick I checked in on this because I started questioning myself, it looks like Kubernetes has implemented a way to defer their provider initialization in order to handle this, although, it sounds like this is not the recommended approach as there can be intermittent issues with it.

As for future, I see this issue open in core: hashicorp/terraform#4149