Add Cloud Task Queue resource #4529
Conversation
|
Linter failed in travis. Running locally with go 1.11.13 confirms that it's failing on code I didn't touch. |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func resourceTaskQueueImportState(d *schema.ResourceData, meta interface{}) ([]*schema.ResourceData, error) { | ||
| parts := strings.Split(d.Id(), "/") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider doing what resource_kms_key_ring.go does for its import, using parseImportId() and replaceVars().
google/resource_task_queue.go
Outdated
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| "retry": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would prefer if this matched the API: retry_config
google/resource_task_queue_test.go
Outdated
| Check: resource.ComposeTestCheckFunc( | ||
| testAccCheckTaskQueueExists( | ||
| "google_task_queue.fizzbuzz", location, queueName, &queue), | ||
| testAccCheckTaskQueueEquals( | ||
| "google_task_queue.fizzbuzz", &queue), | ||
| ), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we need these checks (nor the funcs, and I think that also means we can avoid vendoring this new context dependency) - the ImportStateVerify is sufficient.
|
@tysen, I've removed those tests and renamed |
google/resource_task_queue_test.go
Outdated
|
|
||
| expectedName := fmt.Sprintf("projects/%s/locations/%s/queues/%s", config.Project, attributes["location"], attributes["name"]) | ||
|
|
||
| _, err := config.clientCloudTasks.Projects.Locations.Queues.Get(expectedName).Context(context.Background()).Do() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why include this call to Context? Does this not work without it like the other services?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry for the delay, I was on vacation. I've removed the call to Context.
|
I'd love to start using this. What is holding it up? Can I help? |
|
Still waiting for a response to the question in my review. |
|
I would really love to use it |
|
PR looks good now. If you could submit separate PRs (one for TPG and one for TPGB) to vendor the new dependency (and then rebase this PR to remove the vendoring here), afterwards I can upstream this PR into MM and get it merged. |
mccall114
force-pushed
the
issue-2367-cloud-task-queue-resources
branch
from
d7f79b2 to
fbfcea0
Compare
mccall114
force-pushed
the
issue-2367-cloud-task-queue-resources
branch
from
fbfcea0 to
070e0bf
Compare
|
@tysen, I've rebased this branch and opened #4781 |
|
@mccall114 Looks like you need to sign the CLA GoogleCloudPlatform/magic-modules#2587 |
|
@tysen I just signed it |
|
@mccall114 Thanks, will you post |
|
any updates on this? |
|
I had some issues finalizing this implementation, and it'll be easier to maintain and extend if it's generated by Magic Modules, so I submitted GoogleCloudPlatform/magic-modules#2662 which is under review. |
|
Should be in the next release: GoogleCloudPlatform/magic-modules#2662 |
|
Thanks @tysen! |
|
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
locked and limited conversation to collaborators
New resource
google_task_queueas part of issue #2367.First time contributor here. I read the guidelines about splitting out new packages in a separate PR, and I'm happy to do that if this one is ok.