feat: Use a map for root_block_device instead of list #396
+47
−57
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Yethal
changed the title
|
@antonbabenko Can we merge this? |
|
This breaking change brings little improvements, so I don't think we need to introduce it now. Maybe in the future (during the next major release). |
|
upvote |
|
This PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has been open 30 days |
|
unstale |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
root_block_device variable is now a map instead of list of maps.
Motivation and Context
Since aws_instance resource only allows for a single root_block_device it makes no sense to use a list since it will only ever accept a single element. Moreover storing this configuration in a map instead of wrapping it with a list will make it easier to use with Terragrunt and deep merged configs
Breaking Changes
Yes
Streamline and simplify usage with wrapping automation
How Has This Been Tested?
examples/*to demonstrate and validate my change(s)examples/*projectspre-commit run -aon my pull request