r/ses_receipt_filter - add arn attribute + validations for all arguments + docs

[DrFaust92]

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" or other comments that do not add relevant new information or questions, they generate extra noise for pull request followers and do not help prioritize the request

Relates #13624, #13527

Release note for CHANGELOG:

resource_aws_ses_receipt_filter - add arn attribute
resource_aws_ses_receipt_filter - add plan time validations to `name`, `cidr`, and `policy`
resource_aws_ses_receipt_filter - add missing doc for import and attributes

Output from acceptance testing:

$ make testacc TESTARGS='-run=TestAccAWSSESReceiptFilter_'
--- PASS: TestAccAWSSESReceiptFilter_basic (46.59s)
--- PASS: TestAccAWSSESReceiptFilter_disappears (30.71s)

[bflad]

Please reach out with any questions.

[bflad]

This looks good although you may find it simpler in the future to separate the validation into separate rules for code maintainer and operator readability (since separate errors will all return), e.g.

validation.All(
  validation.StringLenBetween(1, 64),
  validation.StringMatch(regexp.MustCompile(`^[0-9a-zA-Z_-]+$`), "must contain only alphanumeric, underscore, and hyphen characters"),
  validation.StringMatch(regexp.MustCompile(`^[0-9a-zA-Z]`), "must begin with a alphanumeric character"),
  validation.StringMatch(regexp.MustCompile(`[0-9a-zA-Z]$`), "must end with a alphanumeric character"),
),

Once we've seen common patterns of these we may further condense them or make helpers. 👍

[DrFaust92]

You're right, ill split these, it took me 20 mins to play with a regex checker to build this 😿

[bflad]

Since the SES API does not provide the ability to fetch a single filter, this looping is unfortunately necessary to handle accounts with multiple Receipt Filters. Otherwise it will always return errors like:

    TestAccAWSSESReceiptFilter_basic: testing.go:684: Step 0 error: errors during apply:

        Error: Provider produced inconsistent result after apply

        When applying changes to aws_ses_receipt_filter.test, provider "aws" produced
        an unexpected new value for was present, but now absent.

        This is a bug in the provider, which should be reported in the provider's own
        issue tracker.

You can use a pattern like this to move the filter object up:

var filter 

for _, responseFilter := range response.Filters {
  if aws.StringValue(responseFilter.Name) == d.Id() {
    filter = responseFilter
    break
  }
}

if filter == nil {
  // bye bye
}

We should probably add a new covering test for this while we're adjusting this logic, e.g. a test configuration utilizing count and count.index, since this resource does especially need to handle multiple resources correctly.

[DrFaust92]

ive made a small change, let me know what you think. i can revert this to the original for now with minor changes

[DrFaust92]

@bflad , is that what you had in mind?

[bflad]

Looks great 🚀

Output from acceptance testing:

--- PASS: TestAccAWSSESReceiptFilter_disappears (6.36s)
--- PASS: TestAccAWSSESReceiptFilter_basic (8.03s)

[ghost]

This has been released in version 2.68.0 of the Terraform AWS provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading.

For further feature requests or bug reports with this functionality, please create a new GitHub issue following the template for triage. Thanks!

[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!