Update sdk version #6497
Update sdk version #6497
Conversation
IBM-Deeksha
requested review from
hkantare,
kavya498,
omaraibrahim and
uibm
as code owners
|
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if _, ok := d.GetOk("backup_recovery_endpoint"); ok { | ||
| if d.Get("backup_recovery_endpoint").(string) != "" { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don't need if d.Get("backup_recovery_endpoint").(string) explict this check
if _, ok := d.GetOk("backup_recovery_endpoint"); ok it enter this block when you set "backup_recovery_endpoint" itself in config.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if you don't want to allow backup_recovery_endpoint empty string may be add some validation to check n't empty
| @@ -11292,6 +22217,7 @@ func dataSourceIbmBackupRecoveryProtectionSourcesRead(context context.Context, d | |||
| } | |||
| protectionSources = append(protectionSources, protectionSourcesItemMap) | |||
| } | |||
| fmt.Println("protectionSources....", protectionSources) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove all these fmt stmts
| }, | ||
| Description: "Specifies struct with basic user details.", | ||
| Elem: &schema.Resource{ | ||
| Schema: map[string]*schema.Schema{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why we have such big diff here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Apart from the endpoint URL addition, there are a few changes in the schema.
The BRS backend has introduced sub nodes under the original nodes object breaking the current data source.
We have respectively added the same number of sub-nodes in the schema.
|
Add respective documentation changes |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| domain := "cloud.ibm.com" | ||
| serviceName := "backup-recovery" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you add check for IAM endpoint type to decide if required to point to "test.cloud.ibm.com" when internal user targets stage env
|
2 participants
Community Note
Relates OR Closes #0000
Output from acceptance testing: