{"push_id":2878438856,"size":5,"distinct_size":0,"ref":"refs/heads/v0.12-dev","head":"8eb9cf34111af255f82679e0137c06853381691d","before":"675e64bf8a739e15da4402e9fa65f8dff0b2be5e","commits":[{"sha":"23ed878a5d52d6c0e12894d5dee57fb923085dce","author":{"name":"Martin Atkins","email":"a1bdfbfb01322b54f9edf8cea8f328c9384b211a@degeneration.co.uk"},"message":"states: In Module.testString, use incrementing ids for deposed\n\nIn our old world we always used 1-based indices into a slice of deposed\nobjects. The new models instead use a map keyed by pseudorandom strings,\nso that deposed objects will have a consistent identity across multiple\noperations.\n\nHowever, having that pseudo-random string in our test comparison output\nis not helpful, since such strings can never match hard-coded expectation\nstrings. Therefore for the purposes of generating this test comparison\noutput we'll revert back to using 1-based indexes.\n\nThis should avoid problems for tests that only create one deposed object\nper instance, but those which create more than one will need to do some\nmore work since the _ordering_ of these objects in the output is still\npseudorandom as a result of it coming from a map rather than a slice.","distinct":false,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hashicorp/terraform/commits/23ed878a5d52d6c0e12894d5dee57fb923085dce"},{"sha":"c9b13acd8a619b9c3e0f8bc3561611bc69536486","author":{"name":"Martin Atkins","email":"a1bdfbfb01322b54f9edf8cea8f328c9384b211a@degeneration.co.uk"},"message":"core: Legacy ApplyFn handling for MockProvisioner","distinct":false,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hashicorp/terraform/commits/c9b13acd8a619b9c3e0f8bc3561611bc69536486"},{"sha":"46db64f22ae5ef98499243f953a3591491e1debb","author":{"name":"Martin Atkins","email":"a1bdfbfb01322b54f9edf8cea8f328c9384b211a@degeneration.co.uk"},"message":"core: Rewrite EvalApplyProvisioners for new provisioner API","distinct":false,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hashicorp/terraform/commits/46db64f22ae5ef98499243f953a3591491e1debb"},{"sha":"68e1f0f5c3c2cffea516cddf297b93364e6c4851","author":{"name":"Martin Atkins","email":"a1bdfbfb01322b54f9edf8cea8f328c9384b211a@degeneration.co.uk"},"message":"core: Fail better in TestContext2Apply_provisionerDestroyFailContinue\n\n\"bad\" is an unhelpful test assertion failure message.","distinct":false,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hashicorp/terraform/commits/68e1f0f5c3c2cffea516cddf297b93364e6c4851"},{"sha":"8eb9cf34111af255f82679e0137c06853381691d","author":{"name":"Martin Atkins","email":"a1bdfbfb01322b54f9edf8cea8f328c9384b211a@degeneration.co.uk"},"message":"core: EvalApplyProvisioners correct handling of errors\n\nThe error handling here is a bit tricky due to the ability for users to\nopt out of aborting on error. It's important that we keep straight the\ndistinction between applyDiags and diags so we can tell the difference\nbetween the errors from _this_ provisioner and the errors for the entire\nrun so far.","distinct":false,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/hashicorp/terraform/commits/8eb9cf34111af255f82679e0137c06853381691d"}]}
{"actor":{"display_login":"apparentlymart"}}