Add google_logging_project_exclusion resource #990

ctavan · 2018-01-22T15:32:35Z

Adds support for project-level log exclusions, see:
https://cloud.google.com/logging/docs/exclusions

Are you interested in merging this? If so, I could provide additional resources for organizations, folders and billing.

I'm still a bit concerned about some code duplication (like all the stuff in logging_utils and the toBool function which contains logic from https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-google/blob/0133845a19ee292d213ce3607c9550431daeb084/google/resource_container_cluster_test.go#L974-L992 ), so if you have suggestion on how to DRY this a bit, I'd be happy to take a second look.

Test:

==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./google -v -run=TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion -timeout 120m
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_importBasic
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_importBasic (4.50s)
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic (4.51s)
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter (6.42s)
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update (7.22s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-google/google	7.265s

danawillow

Looks good overall! When adding some of the other resources, you might be interested in some of the work done with IAM around repeated code. The logic here is much simpler than that so I don't think it's quite as necessary here, but if you're curious take a look at iam*.go. For this first resource though, I think we should keep it as-is, just with a few small improvements :)

danawillow · 2018-01-24T21:02:42Z

google/import_logging_project_exclusion_test.go

+	"github.com/hashicorp/terraform/helper/resource"
+)
+
+func TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_importBasic(t *testing.T) {


We've just started trying to get away from separating out our import tests, since it usually means we end up essentially running the exact same test twice without realizing it. Mind just moving the import check into the resource test?

danawillow · 2018-01-24T21:04:46Z

google/resource_logging_exclusion.go

+			Optional: true,
+		},
+
+		"filter": {


Another thing we're trying to be more consistent about these days is sorting our fields as Required -> Optional -> Computed, and alphabetically within each.

danawillow · 2018-01-24T21:18:00Z

google/resource_logging_project_exclusion.go

+		return handleNotFoundError(err, d, fmt.Sprintf("Project Logging Exclusion %s", d.Get("name").(string)))
+	}
+
+	flattenResourceLoggingExclusion(d, exclusion)


You should also set the project here in case it was imported from a project that isn't the provider default (and then consequently, set "project" to computed in the schema)

danawillow · 2018-01-24T21:23:40Z

google/resource_logging_project_exclusion_test.go

+}
+
+func toBool(attribute string) (bool, error) {
+	// Handle the case where an unset value defaults to false


nit: This can be made a bit simpler:

if attribute == "" { return false, nil } return strconv.ParseBool(attribute)

The error message that ParseBool returns for an invalid param is strconv.ParseBool: parsing "not-a-bool": invalid syntax which I think is plenty descriptive, especially given that it's just a test failure (as opposed to an end-user message)

danawillow · 2018-01-24T21:26:36Z

website/docs/r/logging_project_exclusion.html.markdown

+
+Manages a project-level logging exclusion. For more information see
+[the official documentation](https://cloud.google.com/logging/docs/) and
+[Exclusing Logs](https://cloud.google.com/logging/docs/exclusions).


typo: Excluding

danawillow · 2018-01-24T21:26:47Z

website/docs/r/logging_project_exclusion.html.markdown

+[Exclusing Logs](https://cloud.google.com/logging/docs/exclusions).
+
+Note that you must have the "Logs Configuration Writer" IAM role (`roles/logging.configWriter`)
+granted to the credentials used with terraform.


nit: Terraform

danawillow · 2018-01-24T21:27:39Z

website/docs/r/logging_project_exclusion.html.markdown

+
+```hcl
+resource "google_logging_project_exclusion" "my-exclusion" {
+    name = "my-pubsub-instance-exclusion"


I know it's just an example config but it does seem a bit out of place to have the name be about pubsub and the description/filter be about GCE

ctavan · 2018-01-25T20:34:39Z

@danawillow thanks the detailed review!

I have taken a look at IAM and tried to find a similar abstraction for log exclusions.

I'm still not 100% happy with the variable naming and the splitting into different source files. If you have good advice here I'd be really happy to improve that further.

Apart from that I have now added folder-level log exclusions using the new abstraction.

It would be great if you could do a second round of review before I add the missing documentation and the missing implementations for billingAccount and organizations log exclusions.

==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./google -v -run=TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion -timeout 120m
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath (17.99s)
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic (18.54s)
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update (20.91s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-google/google	20.937s

ctavan · 2018-01-25T20:35:35Z

Oh, and I will of course squash all commits into one when I'm done… I just left the change commits there for potentially easier review.

ctavan · 2018-01-25T20:41:10Z

google/resource_logging_exclusion.go

+
+		flattenResourceLoggingExclusion(d, exclusion)
+
+		if updater.GetResourceType() == "projects" {


Not sure about putting this special case in here?!

ctavan · 2018-01-25T20:41:48Z

google/resource_logging_exclusion.go

+	return &exclusion, updateMask
+}
+
+// The ResourceLoggingExclusionUpdater interface is implemented for each GCP


Should the stuff that comes below go to a separate file? If so, how should it be called?

ctavan · 2018-01-25T20:42:35Z

google/resource_logging_exclusion.go

+
+	// Textual description of this resource to be used in error message.
+	// The description should include the unique resource identifier.
+	DescribeResource() string


This was more or less copied from IAM. Not sure if it makes entirely sense like that.

ctavan · 2018-01-25T20:52:40Z

website/docs/r/logging_project_exclusion.html.markdown

+    false.
+
+* `project` - (Optional) The project to create the exclusion in. If omitted, the project associated with the provider is
+    used.


@danawillow would you like me to apply the Required -> Optional -> Computed and alphabetical in the groups ordering here in the docs as well?

Yup, thanks for doing that.

ctavan · 2018-02-02T13:08:01Z

@danawillow any chance you could have a second look before I add log-exclusions for organizations and billing?

danawillow

I think I want to backtrack on my previous suggestion. Although this way is less repeating-ourselves-ey, it feels somewhat overcomplicated. I think it might be better to go back to how it originally was and just have these look like typical resources. What do you think?

danawillow · 2018-01-26T19:14:30Z

google/logging_exclusion_folder.go

+func (u *FolderLoggingExclusionUpdater) CreateLoggingExclusion(parent string, exclusion *logging.LogExclusion) error {
+	_, err := u.Config.clientLogging.Folders.Exclusions.Create(parent, exclusion).Do()
+	if err != nil {
+		return errwrap.Wrap(fmt.Errorf("Error creating logging exclusion for %s.", u.DescribeResource()), err)


You should be able to just use errwrap.Wrapf here

danawillow · 2018-01-26T19:17:23Z

google/resource_logging_exclusion.go

+	}
+}
+
+func ResourceLoggingExclusionWithImport(parentSpecificSchema map[string]*schema.Schema, newUpdaterFunc newResourceLoggingExclusionUpdaterFunc) *schema.Resource {


Since I think they'll all support import, let's just do one ResourceLoggingExclusion() that has the import functionality (if you decide to keep this version)

danawillow · 2018-02-02T22:50:49Z

google/resource_logging_folder_exclusion_test.go

+		PreCheck:     func() { testAccPreCheck(t) },
+		Providers:    testAccProviders,
+		CheckDestroy: testAccCheckLoggingFolderExclusionDestroy,
+		Steps: []resource.TestStep{


Can you also add an import step here to test import?

danawillow · 2018-02-02T22:52:24Z

google/resource_logging_project_exclusion_test.go

+				Config: testAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic(exclusionName),
+			},
+
+			resource.TestStep{


Since you already have a test that sets up infrastructure with _basic, we can save a bit of time in the test suite by adding this step into the _basic test.

danawillow · 2018-02-02T22:54:03Z

website/docs/r/logging_project_exclusion.html.markdown

+    false.
+
+* `project` - (Optional) The project to create the exclusion in. If omitted, the project associated with the provider is
+    used.


Yup, thanks for doing that.

nat-henderson · 2018-04-17T00:13:03Z

@ctavan Are you still interested in getting this merged? If you're coming back around to it (no rush!) I'm happy to leave the issue open, but if not, I'll close it as stale in a little while.

ctavan · 2018-04-17T04:41:19Z

@ndmckinley yes I’m still planning to finish this, I just had a longer break from work. I hope I can finish this over the next few weeks.

ctavan · 2018-05-11T13:41:14Z

==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go test ./google -v -run=Exclusion -timeout 120m
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter
=== RUN   TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update
=== PAUSE TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic (3.31s)
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter (3.53s)
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update (3.59s)
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update (4.12s)
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic (1.79s)
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic (1.80s)
=== CONT  TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update (2.86s)
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath (15.81s)
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic (15.92s)
--- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update (18.22s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-google/google	22.399s

ctavan · 2018-05-11T13:58:24Z

@ndmckinley @danawillow I've taken another look at this.

I've tried my best to fix all comments from @danawillow's last review.
I did not go back and revert the generalizations as @danawillow suggested, simply because it would have taken me more time (and I'm a bit short on time at the moment).
I've added the corresponding resources for log exclusions on billingAccounts, organizations, folders and projects, all including tests and documentation. The documentation example for the billingAccounts is a bit artificial, as the filter expression doesn't make a lot of sense, however I didn't really find a way to figure out a more useful filter expression.

Apart from that everything works well for me so far.

ctavan · 2018-05-11T15:53:56Z

@pdecat I just saw your comment in: #1467 (comment)

Does this apply to logging exclusions as well?

pdecat · 2018-05-16T14:47:41Z

Hi @ctavan, I can't really tell, I'm just an occasional contributor.
For sure, Logging Exclusions are not covered yet by MagicModules: https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/magic-modules/tree/master/products
As adding them there still require considerable work, I guess this PR is pretty well advanced enough to go through if that's what worries you.

danawillow

Thanks for doing this, @ctavan! I'm fine with accepting this PR. It'll take some time before we'll be able to magic-modules-ify this API, so this will allow people to use the resources until then (and give you some credit for working hard on them!) One comment about tests, otherwise looks good.

danawillow · 2018-05-16T22:18:55Z

google/resource_logging_billing_account_exclusion_test.go

+				Check: resource.ComposeTestCheckFunc(
+					testAccCheckLoggingBillingAccountExclusionExists("google_logging_billing_account_exclusion.basic", &exclusionAfter),
+					testAccCheckLoggingBillingAccountExclusion(&exclusionAfter, "google_logging_billing_account_exclusion.basic"),
+				),


Can you add an import step here as well? We're trying to move away from custom checks and towards import-as-the-verifier (see #778 for how it all works)

That was actually a good one! 👍

Not here, but in the folder test:

testing.go:513: Step 1 error: ImportStateVerify attributes not equivalent. Difference is shown below. Top is actual, bottom is expected. (map[string]string) (len=1) { (string) (len=6) "folder": (string) (len=12) "355928736271" } (map[string]string) (len=1) { (string) (len=6) "folder": (string) (len=20) "folders/355928736271" }

Will submit the updates shortly.

ctavan · 2018-05-17T13:34:01Z

@danawillow thanks for the feedback! No worries, I'm not so much after the credit, rather after being able to use this feature with the upstream terraform google provider ;).

Your comment on the test import made me stumble upon an issue:

The logging_folder_sink is allowing two different notations for the folder:

* `folder` - (Required) The folder to be exported to the sink. Note that either [FOLDER_ID] or "folders/[FOLDER_ID]" is
    accepted.

I was copying the interface but that actually poses a problem for the import: When importing the resource I don't know which notation I should use. Hence the test fails with:

	testing.go:513: Step 1 error: ImportStateVerify attributes not equivalent. Difference is shown below. Top is actual, bottom is expected.

		(map[string]string) (len=1) {
		 (string) (len=6) "folder": (string) (len=12) "355928736271"
		}


		(map[string]string) (len=1) {
		 (string) (len=6) "folder": (string) (len=20) "folders/355928736271"
		}

If I understand it right I do not have any access to the resourceData that corresponds to the resource being imported in the ResourceImporter StateFunc, at least that's what the comments in the code state. I have only access to the resource ID there. So I can't tell if the folder was specified with folders/ prefix in the schema or without.
The logging_folder_sink resources specifies a DiffSuppressFunc, but it seems that this diff func is NOT being used in the ImportStateVerify step, hence the failed test output above. https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-google/blob/master/google/resource_logging_folder_sink.go#L21

This left me with a few questions:

Do you see any way of resolving that import problem?
If not, why would we want to allow two different notations for folder in the first place? Restricting to one (probably folders/XXX, since that's what the google_folder resource spits out as name) would prevent the issue. Also, the logging_folder_sink is the only place I could find where such logic for the folder id is used.

So I fear I need some help from you before I can finally finish up this PR. Thanks in advance!

danawillow · 2018-05-17T23:20:51Z

Good question! I've run into similar scenarios a few times, but I can't remember if I had any clever way of solving it. I think I would just do an ImportStateVerifyIgnore for that attribute, add a comment as to why, and check the attribute manually with a resource.TestCheckResourceAttr.

ctavan · 2018-05-18T12:44:01Z

@danawillow thanks for the suggestion. I just tried to do what you described but ran into another issue: As far as I understand, the ImportState test step returns the old state: https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform/blob/9504d17bd9dd3cfb6339d11ceddb8805535fd1b3/helper/resource/testing_import_state.go#L148

Meaning, the actual state is not modified by the import, so I don't see how resource.TestCheckResourceAttr could be used to check the value of the imported folder attribute.

I went a different route and used ImportStateVerifyIgnore in combination with ImportStateCheck. Would be great if you could have another look at this test case.

Apart from this I hope I have finally all things covered. I also run the acceptance tests again, output is in the commit message.

Adds support for log exclusions in billingAccounts, organizations, folders and projects, see: https://cloud.google.com/logging/docs/exclusions ``` ==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements... TF_ACC=1 go test ./google -v -run=Exclusion -timeout 120m === RUN TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic === PAUSE TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic === RUN TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update === PAUSE TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update === RUN TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic === PAUSE TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic === RUN TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath === PAUSE TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath === RUN TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update === PAUSE TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update === RUN TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic === PAUSE TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic === RUN TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update === PAUSE TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update === RUN TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic === PAUSE TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic === RUN TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter === PAUSE TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter === RUN TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update === PAUSE TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update === CONT TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic === CONT TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update === CONT TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update === CONT TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath === CONT TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic --- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update (3.60s) --- PASS: TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update (4.40s) === CONT TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update --- PASS: TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic (1.90s) === CONT TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic --- PASS: TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic (6.21s) === CONT TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update --- PASS: TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update (5.90s) === CONT TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter --- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter (3.90s) === CONT TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic --- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath (16.67s) --- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic (1.96s) --- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic (15.30s) --- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update (18.35s) PASS ok github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-google/google 22.810s ```

danawillow

Sure, that's fair. Thanks @ctavan! I'll go ahead and merge this now.

(also in the future, if you could avoid squashing your commits, that makes it easier for me to review so I can see what changed in between comments. No worries for this time though)

ctavan · 2018-05-18T15:57:17Z

Oops, sorry for squashing the fixups rightaway. Do you usually squash upon merge? Then I'll of course keep the commits after review rounds!

Anyways, thanks for your patience with the reviews and thanks for merging @danawillow !

danawillow · 2018-05-18T16:00:25Z

Yup! No problem!

Adds support for log exclusions in billingAccounts, organizations, folders and projects, see: https://cloud.google.com/logging/docs/exclusions ``` ==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements... TF_ACC=1 go test ./google -v -run=Exclusion -timeout 120m === RUN TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic === PAUSE TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic === RUN TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update === PAUSE TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update === RUN TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic === PAUSE TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic === RUN TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath === PAUSE TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath === RUN TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update === PAUSE TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update === RUN TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic === PAUSE TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic === RUN TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update === PAUSE TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update === RUN TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic === PAUSE TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic === RUN TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter === PAUSE TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter === RUN TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update === PAUSE TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update === CONT TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic === CONT TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update === CONT TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update === CONT TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath === CONT TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic --- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_update (3.60s) --- PASS: TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_update (4.40s) === CONT TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update --- PASS: TestAccLoggingOrganizationExclusion_basic (1.90s) === CONT TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic --- PASS: TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_basic (6.21s) === CONT TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update --- PASS: TestAccLoggingBillingAccountExclusion_update (5.90s) === CONT TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter --- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_disablePreservesFilter (3.90s) === CONT TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic --- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_folderAcceptsFullFolderPath (16.67s) --- PASS: TestAccLoggingProjectExclusion_basic (1.96s) --- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_basic (15.30s) --- PASS: TestAccLoggingFolderExclusion_update (18.35s) PASS ok github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-google/google 22.810s ```

ghost · 2018-11-18T14:04:58Z

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!

ctavan mentioned this pull request Jan 22, 2018

Use updateMask for google_logging_project_sink update #991

Closed

ctavan force-pushed the project-log-exclusion branch from bf4280f to b8cf602 Compare January 22, 2018 15:40

danawillow reviewed Jan 24, 2018

View reviewed changes

ctavan closed this Jan 24, 2018

ctavan reopened this Jan 24, 2018

ctavan force-pushed the project-log-exclusion branch from b8cf602 to e61cc39 Compare January 25, 2018 20:29

ctavan commented Jan 25, 2018

View reviewed changes

danawillow reviewed Feb 2, 2018

View reviewed changes

nat-henderson added the waiting-response label Apr 17, 2018

nat-henderson removed the waiting-response label Apr 17, 2018

paddycarver mentioned this pull request Apr 30, 2018

<Feature Request> Logging exclusions resource #1404

Closed

nat-henderson added the waiting-response label May 7, 2018

ctavan force-pushed the project-log-exclusion branch from e28f5f4 to 8412599 Compare May 11, 2018 10:37

ctavan force-pushed the project-log-exclusion branch 4 times, most recently from 5191157 to 8623f55 Compare May 11, 2018 13:50

ctavan force-pushed the project-log-exclusion branch from 8623f55 to dce86ba Compare May 11, 2018 13:59

nat-henderson removed the waiting-response label May 11, 2018

danawillow approved these changes May 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

ctavan force-pushed the project-log-exclusion branch from dce86ba to 1f26768 Compare May 18, 2018 12:42

ctavan force-pushed the project-log-exclusion branch from 1f26768 to 1224341 Compare May 18, 2018 12:44

ctavan force-pushed the project-log-exclusion branch from 1224341 to 2c2e77c Compare May 18, 2018 12:47

danawillow approved these changes May 18, 2018

View reviewed changes

danawillow merged commit 0bcb012 into hashicorp:master May 18, 2018

ctavan deleted the project-log-exclusion branch May 18, 2018 15:57

ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 18, 2018


		flattenResourceLoggingExclusion(d, exclusion)

		if updater.GetResourceType() == "projects" {

Add google_logging_project_exclusion resource #990

Add google_logging_project_exclusion resource #990

Conversation

ctavan commented Jan 22, 2018 • edited by rosbo Loading

danawillow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ctavan commented Jan 25, 2018

ctavan commented Jan 25, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ctavan commented Feb 2, 2018

danawillow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nat-henderson commented Apr 17, 2018

ctavan commented Apr 17, 2018

ctavan commented May 11, 2018

ctavan commented May 11, 2018

ctavan commented May 11, 2018

pdecat commented May 16, 2018

danawillow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ctavan commented May 17, 2018

danawillow commented May 17, 2018

ctavan commented May 18, 2018

danawillow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ctavan commented May 18, 2018

danawillow commented May 18, 2018

ghost commented Nov 18, 2018

ctavan commented Jan 22, 2018 •

edited by rosbo

Loading