* Rename module name from "github.com/hashicorp/terraform" to "github.com/placeholderplaceholderplaceholder/opentf".
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
* Gofmt.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
* Regenerate protobuf.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
* Fix comments.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
* Undo issue and pull request link changes.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
* Undo comment changes.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
* Fix comment.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
* Undo some link changes.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
* make generate && make protobuf
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
---------
Signed-off-by: Jakub Martin <kubam@spacelift.io>
The dag package did not previously provide a topological walk of a given
graph. While the existing combination of a transitive reduction with a
depth-first walk appeared to accomplish this, depth-first is only
equivalent with a simple tree. If there are multiple paths to a node, a
depth-first approach will skip dependencies from alternate paths.
We introduced the addrs.UniqueKey and addrs.UniqueKeyer mechanics as part
of implementing the ValidateMoves and ApplyMoves functions, as a way to
better encapsulate the solution to the problem that lots of our address
types aren't comparable and so cannot be used directly as map keys.
However, exposing addrs.UniqueKey handling directly in the logic adds
various noise to the algorithms and, in particular, obscures the fact that
MoveResults.Changes and MoveResult.Blocked both have different map key
types.
Here then we'll use the new addrs.Map helper type, which encapsulates the
idea of a map from an addrs.UniqueKeyer type to an arbitrary value type,
using the unique keys as the map keys internally. This does unfortunately
mean that we lose the conventional Go map access syntax and have to use
a method-based API instead, but I (subjectively) think that's an okay
compromise in return for avoiding the need to keep track inline of which
addrs.UniqueKey values correspond with which real addresses.
This is intended as an entirely-mechanical change, with equivalent
behavior to what it replaced. If anything here is doing something
materially different than what it replaced then that's a mistake.
When applying module `moved` statements by iterating through modules in
state, we previously required an exact match from the `moved`
statement's `from` field and the module address. This permitted moving
resources directly inside a module, but did not recur into module calls
within those moved modules.
This commit moves that exact match requirement so that it only applies
to `moved` statements targeting resources. In turn this allows nested
modules to be moved.
When we originally stubbed ApplyMoves we didn't know yet how exactly we'd
be using the result, so we made it a double-indexed map allowing looking
up moves in both directions.
However, in practice we only actually need to look up old addresses by new
addresses, and so this commit first removes the double indexing so that
each move is only represented by one element in the map.
We also need to describe situations where a move was blocked, because in
a future commit we'll generate some warnings in those cases. Therefore
ApplyMoves now returns a MoveResults object which contains both a map of
changes and a map of blocks. The map of blocks isn't used yet as of this
commit, but we'll use it in a later commit to produce warnings within
the "terraform" package.
Per our rule that the content of the state can never make a move statement
invalid, our behavior for two objects trying to occupy the same address
will be to just ignore that and let the object already at the address
take priority.
For the moment this is silent from an end-user perspective and appears
only in our internal logs. However, I'm hoping that our future planned
adjustment to the interface of this function will include some way to
allow reporting these collisions in some end-user-visible way, either as
a separate warning per collision or as a single warning that collects
together all of the collisions into a single message somehow.
This situation can arise both because the previous run state already
contained an object at the target address of a move and because more than
one move ends up trying to target the same location. In the latter case,
which one "wins" is decided by our depth-first traversal order, which is
in turn derived from our chaining and nesting rules and is therefore
arbitrary but deterministic.
This is a whole lot of nothing right now, just stubbing out some control
flow that ultimately just leads to TODOs that cause it to do nothing at
all.
My intent here is to get this cross-cutting skeleton in place and thus
make it easier for us to collaborate on adding the meat to it, so that
it's more likely we can work on different parts separately and still get
a result that tessellates.
