Documentation: Alias form of secret name in google_cloud_run_service is not correct

[nxhuy-github]

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. If the issue is assigned to the "modular-magician" user, it is either in the process of being autogenerated, or is planned to be autogenerated soon. If the issue is assigned to a user, that user is claiming responsibility for the issue. If the issue is assigned to "hashibot", a community member has claimed the issue already.

Description

In the documentation of the resource google_cloud_run_service, the secret_key_ref block said that, with name argument, we could define an alias by using the form::projects//secrets/ but this form didn't work at all. And because of that, we could not use the secrets in Cloud Run if our secrets come from a different project !!! Same thing happens with the secret_name argument (which is required) in secret block.

New or Affected Resource(s)

• google_cloud_run_service

Potential Terraform Configuration

# The right format should be:
uuid:projects/project_id/secrets/secret_name
# where:
#     - uuid: an (random) unique ID associated with the secret
#     - project_id: the project number for the project the secret was created in
#     - secret_name: the secret name 

References

• https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/google/latest/docs/resources/cloud_run_service#nested_secret_key_ref
• https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/google/latest/docs/resources/cloud_run_service#nested_secret

[melinath]

The problem here seems to be that the doc strings use < and > to enclose variables, which apparently gets interpreted by the docs as html elements. b/237555049

[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.