azurerm_databricks_access_connector documentation issues

[mvvsubbu]

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

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

Terraform Version

1.0.0

AzureRM Provider Version

1.0.0

Affected Resource(s)/Data Source(s)

azurerm_databricks_access_connector

Terraform Configuration Files

https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/azurerm/latest/docs/resources/databricks_access_connector#identity

There are few issues in the terraform provider documentation, I am listing them below.

1. identity - (Required) An identity block as defined below. --> This is not a required argument for the request, it is optional one.
2. principal_id - (Optional) The object id of an existing principal. If not specified, a new system-assigned managed identity is created. --> This description is incorrect. This should be "The Principal Id associated with this system-assigned managed identity."

Debug Output/Panic Output

NA

Expected Behaviour

Described Above

Actual Behaviour

Doc issue

Steps to Reproduce

No response

Important Factoids

No response

References

No response

[sinbai]

@mvvsubbu thanks for opening this issue. I have submitted PR #20342 to remove the principal_id and tenant_id from the Terraform doc as they are read-only properties. Also, the identity were updated to be optional rather than required. Could you track the PR #20342 for more updates?

[github-actions]

This functionality has been released in v3.43.0 of the Terraform 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 issue 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 similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.