Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add "owner" as valid access level for the group_access_token resource #999

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 4, 2022

Conversation

defreng
Copy link

@defreng defreng commented Apr 1, 2022

Description

The Gitlab API documentation does not mention the possibility to select access level 50 (=owner), but this option is both working (I verified it manually with an API call) and also exposed in the Gitlab UI:

image

PR Checklist Acknowledgement

  • I acknowledge that all of the following items are true, where applicable:
    • Resource attributes match 1:1 the names and structure of the API resource in the GitLab API documentation.
    • Examples are updated with:
      • A *.tf file for the resource/s with at least one usage example
      • A *.sh file for the resource/s with an import example (if applicable)
    • New resources have at minimum a basic test with three steps:
      • Create the resource
      • Update the attributes
      • Import the resource
    • No new //lintignore comments were copied from existing code. (Linter rules are meant to be enforced on new code.)

@github-actions github-actions bot added provider resource Adds or modifies a resource size/XS labels Apr 1, 2022
Copy link

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Welcome @defreng 👋

It looks like this is your first submission to the Terraform GitLab Provider! If you haven’t already done so, please make sure you have checked out our CONTRIBUTING.md guide to make sure your contribution has all the necessary elements in place for a successful approval.

Thanks again, and welcome to the community! 😃

@timofurrer
Copy link
Member

Aleeexx 👋

Can you prove that it works by adding a new test step? 💃

@defreng
Copy link
Author

defreng commented Apr 1, 2022

Timo! 🙌

Would you have any objections against just changing the existing tests to use the "owner" access level instead of maintainer?

@timofurrer
Copy link
Member

Hmmm, I think eventually it would be nice to check all the accepted access levels (maybe something for another PR though). Thus, let's add a separate test step :)

@timofurrer
Copy link
Member

@defreng Can you please rebase so that the tests are passing again?

@timofurrer timofurrer added the needs-rebase For PRs which need a rebase label Apr 3, 2022
@defreng
Copy link
Author

defreng commented Apr 3, 2022

done 🙂

@armsnyder armsnyder removed the needs-rebase For PRs which need a rebase label Apr 3, 2022
Copy link
Collaborator

@armsnyder armsnyder left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm 🚀

Copy link
Member

@timofurrer timofurrer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM 🎉

@timofurrer timofurrer merged commit b7d4d4f into gitlabhq:main Apr 4, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 9, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants