Doc update: aws_codecommit_repository does not support default_branch

[jwatson0]

The website docs list 'default_branch' as an attribute of aws_codecommit_repository, but this attribute is not in the current code.

module.codecommit.output.default_branch: Resource
'aws_codecommit_repository.repo' does not have attribute 
'default_branch' for variable 'aws_codecommit_repository.repo.default_branch'

See also: https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/blob/master/aws/data_source_aws_codecommit_repository.go

Community Note

• Please vote on this pull request by adding a 👍 reaction to the original pull request comment to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
• Please do not leave "+1" comments, they generate extra noise for pull request followers and do not help prioritize the request

[bflad]

Hi @jwatson0 👋 Thanks for submitting this. The code you link to is for the data source while the change is for the resource documentation. The resource does indeed support the default_branch argument:

https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/blob/964e6be60f53e594f833e46c2d993e2cd77028f7/aws/resource_aws_codecommit_repository.go#L57-L60

And is acceptance tested here:

https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/blob/964e6be60f53e594f833e46c2d993e2cd77028f7/aws/resource_aws_codecommit_repository_test.go#L80-L124

What you might be seeing instead is that the resource is only making the default_branch attribute available if it was specified, which may be an implementation bug:

https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/blob/964e6be60f53e594f833e46c2d993e2cd77028f7/aws/resource_aws_codecommit_repository.go#L132-L136

And noted in the testing here with the ...NoResourceAttr:

https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/blob/964e6be60f53e594f833e46c2d993e2cd77028f7/aws/resource_aws_codecommit_repository_test.go#L110-L111

So that said, we likely cannot accept this change since the argument is valid, but indeed the behavior is currently confusing and probably warrants a resource code fix.

[bflad]

Closing given the previous comment.

[ghost]

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. Thanks!