Open skgsergio opened 1 month ago
Interesting @skgsergio I will try to take a look
Interesting @skgsergio I will try to take a look
Thanks for the issue @skgsergio, and for the enthusiasm @Chambras. We're looking at this as part of a larger piece of work sometime after the release of 4.0. It looks like a simple thing on the surface, but we need to be mindful of a number of other related changes so we don't block those by implementing something too early. If we can ask that contributors don't try and tackle this one until we've had opportunity to review the whole task, that would be appreciated as we'd likely end up needing to close PR's, which we prefer not to have to do.
Thanks!
Thanks for the background and explanation @jackofallops I totally understand!
Is there an existing issue for this?
Community Note
Description
In some scenarios like creating a
azurerm_data_protection_backup_instance_disk
is useful to have theazurerm_linux_virtual_machine.example.os_disk[0].id
in order to avoid having to do the extra step of creating adata.azurerm_managed_disk.example_os_disk
resource.AFAIK in
go-azure-sdk
the ID is already present inOSDisk.ManagedDisk.Id
.New or Affected Resource(s)/Data Source(s)
azurerm_linux_virtual_machine, azurerm_windows_virtual_machine
Potential Terraform Configuration
No response
References
No response