This also sets an additional variable if it detects that this is an alpha
or development build, which currently does nothing but might eventually
turn on the ability to use experimental features, if we make that
something available only in prereleases.
The actions/checkout workflow does some heroics to try to fetch exactly
the commit being built and nothing else, even if asked to fetch the
history leading up to that commit. That means we don't end up having
enough information to get an accurate answer from "git describe".
Since we're intentionally relying on the git history here, we'll fetch
all of the tags explicitly after initial checkout. Although that does add
some delay to this step, we're intentionally doing this version
calculation only once as a separate workflow job so that all of the other
jobs can still benefit from this action's quicker checkout behavior.
When a user reports a "Configuration contains unknown value" error,
there is no information on what might have been unknown during apply.
Add unknown attribute paths to the diagnostic message to provide some
more information when a reproduction may not be possible. Sine this is
one of those "should never happen" types of errors which will be
reported to the developers directly, we can leave the format as the raw
internal representation for simplicity.
5417975946 addressed a regression in the
logic for catching when the newer module meta-arguments are used in
conjunction with the legacy practice of including provider configurations
inside modules, where the check started incorrectly catching situations
where the legacy nested provider configuration was in the same module
as the child call using one of those meta-arguments.
This is a regression test to catch if a similar bug arises in the future.
Since it's testing validation rules that apply to an entire configuration
tree, it ended up in a rather idiosyncratic location under the "configload"
package, rather than directly in "configs". The "configs" package only
knows how to load one module at a time, so it's harder to write a test
like this in that context. Due to it being further removed from the code
it is testing, I included a test for the correct error too in order to
increase the chance that we'll learn if future changes in the "configs"
package invalidate this regression test.
I've verified that this new test fails without the change made in the
earlier commit.
This fixes a bug introduced in 1879a39 in which initialising a module will fail
if that module contains both a provider block and a module call using for_each.
The version that was in use previously broke my runs with a nice `ssh:
handshake failed: agent unsupported algorithm "ssh-ed25519"` error. I
took a further look into this, and saw that the change that broke ssh
for me was fixed in https://github.com/golang/crypto/commit/46612604a.
Yay!
In configurations which have already been initialized, updating the
source of a non-root module call to an invalid value could cause a nil
pointer panic. This commit fixes the bug and adds test coverage.
