Fixes: #5509
When changing from a passphrase provider to a cloud secrets provider,
the encryptionsalt is not required, so we should ensure this is removed
These changes add support for provider-side previews of create and
update operations, which allows resource providers to supply output
property values for resources that are being created or updated during a
preview.
If a plugin supports provider-side preview, its create/update methods
will be invoked during previews with the `preview` property set to true.
It is the responsibility of the provider to fill in any output
properties that are known before returning. It is a best practice for
providers to only fill in property values that are guaranteed to be
identical if the preview were instead an update (i.e. only those output
properties whose values can be conclusively determined without
actually performing the create/update operation should be populated).
Providers that support previews must accept unknown values in their
create and update methods.
If a plugin does not support provider-side preview, the inputs to a
create or update operation will be propagated to the outputs as they are
today.
Fixes#4992.
The logic for validating prompted values in 'new' wasn't quite right,
leading to the possibility of creating Pulumi.yaml files with blank
project names.
This manifests in various ways and I've hit it a number of times
over the past few months because of the way we handle project/stack
name conflicts in 'new' -- which itself is a bit annoying too:
https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/blob/master/pkg/cmd/pulumi/new.go#L206-L207
Because we substitue a default value of "", and because the prompting
logic assumed default values are always valid, we would skip validation
and therefore accept a blank Pulumi.yaml file.
This generates an invalid project which causes errors elsewhere, such as
error: failed to load Pulumi project located at ".../Pulumi.yaml":
project is missing a 'name' attribute
I hit this all the time with our getting started guide because I've
gone through it so many times and have leftover stacks from prior
run-throughs. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people hit this.
The solution here validates all values, including the default.
Note also that we failed to validate the value used by 'new --yes'
which meant you could bypass all validation by passing --yes, leading
to similar outcomes.
I've added a couple new tests for these cases. There is a risk we
depend on illegal default values somewhere which will now be rejected,
but that would seem strange, and assuming the tests pass, I would
assume that's not true. Let me know if that's wrong.
Fixespulumi/pulumi#3255.
A recent change to output deserialization resulted in secrets being returned unwrapped. This change addresses the regression, ensuring any unwrapped secret values are rewrapped before being returned.
Instead of simplifying any module that ends with `/<name>`, only simplify
types where `<name>` matches the type name portion after camel-casing.
This continues to simplify tfbridge types like `aws:s3/bucket:Bucket`,
but would not simplify a type like `aws:s3:Bucket`.
We recently made a change to the Python codegen to emit `int` type annotations, instead of `float`, for properties that are typed as `schema.IntType`.
But the number values that come back from protobuf structs are always floats (like JSON), so we need to cast the values intended to be integers to `int`.
