Skip to content

Conversation

l-teles
Copy link
Contributor

@l-teles l-teles commented Jun 17, 2025

This PR updates the datadog_downtime_schedule schema documentation, moving the monitor_identifier resource to required, since it's not optional:

* Failed to execute "terraform validate" in ../dummy/mycode
  ╷
  │ Error: Invalid Block
  │ 
  │   with datadog_downtime_schedule.i_want_to_go_down,
  │   on downtimes.tf line 7, in resource "datadog_downtime_schedule" "i_want_to_go_down":
  │    7: resource "datadog_downtime_schedule" "i_want_to_go_down" {
  │ 
  │ Block monitor_identifier must have a configuration value as the provider
  │ has marked it as required
  ╵

@l-teles l-teles requested review from a team as code owners June 17, 2025 08:00
@l-teles l-teles changed the title Scheduled downtime resource: Make monitor_identifier required datadog_downtime_schedule resource: Make monitor_identifier required Jun 17, 2025
@Supam Supam changed the title datadog_downtime_schedule resource: Make monitor_identifier required [datadog_downtime_schedule] resource: Make monitor_identifier required Jun 17, 2025
@l-teles l-teles requested a review from a team as a code owner June 24, 2025 22:29
@l-teles l-teles force-pushed the Fix-resource-schema-in-downtime_schedule branch 4 times, most recently from b95c5b6 to 1ef59a5 Compare June 24, 2025 22:46
@l-teles
Copy link
Contributor Author

l-teles commented Jun 24, 2025

All commits are signed now 👍

@l-teles l-teles force-pushed the Fix-resource-schema-in-downtime_schedule branch from 56dbca4 to b95c5b6 Compare October 6, 2025 22:23
@l-teles l-teles force-pushed the Fix-resource-schema-in-downtime_schedule branch from b95c5b6 to 9669b97 Compare October 6, 2025 22:26
@l-teles
Copy link
Contributor Author

l-teles commented Oct 6, 2025

Hey @maycmlee / @Supam,
It looks like something got messed up here. I've updated the branch with the latest changes from master and pushed the proposed changes again.
Can you please reapprove the PR (if needed) and trigger the necessary workflows to have this merged?

Copy link
Contributor

@maycmlee maycmlee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi @l-teles, my approval is still there, but reapproving just in case. I'm not familiar with Terraform releases, but it looks like you still need approval from API Reliability.

@Supam
Copy link
Member

Supam commented Oct 13, 2025

Hi there @l-teles
Looking at your pr, this will unfortunately not pass our CI as our documentation is generated using Terraform's tfplugindocs.
Furthermore this unwanted behaviour is a known bug form their tool: hashicorp/terraform-plugin-docs#363.
As far I understand, they do not have any plans on fixing the issue with how docs are generated for blocks and are recommending that people use nested attributes, which are only supported with protocol version 6.

The current workaround for this issue would be for us to disable the auto-generation for this resource and update the documentation by hand after. I will speak with the owning team internally if they would like to proceed with this or if they have something else planned.

Cheers

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants