Implement azure source #517
Conversation
|
|
|
Thank you for your submission! We require that all contributors sign our Contributor License Agreement ("CLA") before we can accept the contribution. Read and sign the agreement Learn more about why HashiCorp requires a CLA and what the CLA includes Have you signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Recheck it. |
|
Related to #222? |
That's true. To be honest I didn't see it, but the PR is like 4 years old. An on the other hand, in this PR #395 manicminer commented that we should use How would you suggest for me to continue? Should I contribute somehow to #222? I think it's not using giovanni's either. Thanks! |
|
Hi @gerardsegarra, I'd say no, keep this PR open. If we review one, we can close both of them. I am not sure why the previous did not get fully reviewed and included, other than it being a low priority for the Azure Provider team (at HashiCorp). It can be hard to get changes through in |
|
Just for tracking, it's probably worth linking this to the original issue #33, that this is intended to solve. |
|
@gerardsegarra How are you getting on with this? Is there anything you could use help with to help get this over the line? |
|
hey @tony-harverson-moonpig , I haven't had time to continue on my free time so far. I got stuck with the testing as if you look at the other cloud modules, they use private keys to run integration tests with private resources. Maybe @crw has a proposal on how we can do that? Maybe the team from hashicrop could collaborate creating the internal testing? |
|
Apologies I do not have a suggestion. I am going to see if I can find someone who can decide on this PR. As I mentioned earlier, it can be hard to get changes in |
WIP implement azure as a source module.