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

feat(SFS): Synchronized SFS resource, unit test and document. #1101

Conversation

liwanting0517
Copy link
Contributor

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue this PR fixes:
(optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)
fixes #xxx

Special notes for your reviewer:

Release note:


PR Checklist

  • Tests added/passed.
  • Documentation updated.
  • Schema updated.

Acceptance Steps Performed

=== RUN   TestAccSFSAccessRuleV2_basic
=== PAUSE TestAccSFSAccessRuleV2_basic
=== CONT  TestAccSFSAccessRuleV2_basic
--- PASS: TestAccSFSAccessRuleV2_basic (105.56s)
PASS

@liwanting0517 liwanting0517 changed the title feat(NAT): Synchronized SFS resource, unit test and document. feat(SFS): Synchronized SFS resource, unit test and document. Jan 17, 2024
Comment on lines 61 to 62
* `region` - (Optional, String, ForceNew) Specifies the region in which to create the RDS instance resource.
If omitted, the provider-level region will be used. Changing this will create a new RDS instance resource.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There should not be ... RDS instance ..., reference Huaweicloud

Comment on lines 77 to 79
data "flexibleengine_vpc_v1" "test" {
name = "tf-xxx"
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There should be formated

data "flexibleengine_vpc_v1" "test" {
  name = "tf-xxx"
}

Comment on lines 96 to 98
data "flexibleengine_vpc_v1" "test" {
name = "tf-xxx"
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ditto

@liwanting0517 liwanting0517 force-pushed the lwt_dev_sfs_access_rule_v2 branch from b1531a3 to f609b3e Compare January 17, 2024 09:29
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.

2 participants