fix: change the variable name to skip_cos_sm_auth_policy in instance DA

[Soaib024]

Description

https://github.com/terraform-ibm-modules/terraform-ibm-cos/issues/700

Release required?

• [ ] No release
• [ ] Patch release (x.x.X)
• [x] Minor release (x.X.x)
• [ ] Major release (X.x.x)

Release notes content

• Changed the varible name to skip_cos_sm_auth_policy from skip_cos_kms_auth_policy
• Changed the resource name from ibm_iam_authorization_policy.policy to ibm_iam_authorization_policy.secrets_manager_key_manager to make it consistent with elastic-search
• Added moved block to avoid breaking change
• Added ibm_iam_authorization_policy.secrets_manager_key_manager.description

Your notes help the merger write the commit message for the PR that is published in the release notes for the module. --->

Run the pipeline

If the CI pipeline doesn't run when you create the PR, the PR requires a user with GitHub collaborators access to run the pipeline.

Run the CI pipeline when the PR is ready for review and you expect tests to pass. Add a comment to the PR with the following text:

/run pipeline

Checklist for reviewers

• [ ] If relevant, a test for the change is included or updated with this PR.
• [ ] If relevant, documentation for the change is included or updated with this PR.

For mergers

• Use a conventional commit message to set the release level. Follow the guidelines.
• Include information that users need to know about the PR in the commit message. The commit message becomes part of the GitHub release notes.
• Use the Squash and merge option.

[Soaib024]

/run pipeline

[Soaib024]

/run pipeline

[Soaib024]

/run pipeline

[Soaib024]

/run pipeline

[Soaib024]

The code changes are good and complete.

My only concern is that I do not understand what changing an input parameter in a DA has for DA upgrades. For example a DA upgrading from 8.10.4 (or earlier) to this release has to know to use the old value as the new input. Or are consumers expected to run a plan and fix any unexpected changes?

@shemau Updating a variable name seems to be okay: https://ibm-cloudplatform.slack.com/archives/CG06FQ31P/p1712851797463179?thread_ts=1712851726.833909&cid=CG06FQ31P

[terraform-ibm-modules-ops]

:tada: This issue has been resolved in version 8.11.0 :tada:

The release is available on:

• GitHub release
• v8.11.0

Your semantic-release bot :package::rocket:

[ocofaigh]

@Soaib024 It seems we introduced a regression in this PR. See https://github.com/terraform-ibm-modules/terraform-ibm-cos/issues/708