feat(nullplatform): cover Lambda@Edge associations and aws-parameter-store in the provider_config modules - #562
Merged
Conversation
…-files The static-files provider spec (scopes-static-files, scope-configuration.json.tpl) declares distribution.lambda_associations and its CloudFront setup reads it, but the typed module introduced in 6.9.0 never modelled the field, so an install that attaches a Lambda@Edge function could not move off the generic attributes input. Adds aws_lambda_associations (event_type + function_arn, one per CloudFront event, enum-validated). The key is only sent when the list is non-empty, so configurations without associations keep producing the same payload as before.
…e type The module was hardcoded to aws-secrets-manager, the only type in use where it was written. Installs that store non-secret parameters in SSM Parameter Store (parameters-provider, aws-parameter-store-configuration.json.tpl) had no typed path and were stuck on the pre-6.9.0 attributes input. Adds the type with its spec defaults (applies_to [non_secret], kms_key_id "", tier Standard) and a validated tier variable. applies_to now defaults to each type's own spec default instead of a fixed [secret]; callers that set it explicitly are unaffected. Both provider_config modules get tftest suites and join the nullplatform test job.
gdrojas
approved these changes
Sep 4, 2026
release-application Bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 4, 2026
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop* --- ## [7.3.0](v7.2.1...v7.3.0) (2026-09-04) ### Features * **nullplatform:** cover Lambda@Edge associations and aws-parameter-store in the provider_config modules ([#562](#562)) ([bdb03e0](bdb03e0)) --- This PR was generated with [Release Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See [documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please).
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why
6.9.0 retyped
scope_configurationandparameter_storage_configuration(#9a0e87ab): the free-formattributesinput was replaced by typed variables that mirror each provider spec. The types were modelled after the consumers visible at the time, and two configurations that the platform supports were left without a typed path, so installs using them are stuck on the pre-6.9.0 module and itsignore_changes = [attributes]:scopes-static-filesdeclaresdistribution.lambda_associationsinspecs/scope-configuration.json.tpland its CloudFront setup reads it (providers["scope-configurations"].distribution.lambda_associations). The module never modelled the field.parameter_storage_configurationis hardcoded toaws-secrets-manager. Installs storing non-secret parameters in SSM (parameters-provider,aws-parameter-store-configuration.json.tpl) have no type to select.What
scope_configuration
aws_lambda_associations: list of{ event_type, function_arn },event_typevalidated against the spec enum (viewer-request,viewer-response,origin-request,origin-response), no repeated events, static-files/aws only.parameter_storage_configuration
type = "aws-parameter-store"with the spec defaults:sensibility.applies_to = ["non_secret"],setup.kms_key_id = "",setup.tier = "Standard".tiervariable (Standard | Advanced | Intelligent-Tiering), parameter-store only.applies_tonow defaults to each type's own spec default instead of a fixed["secret"]. Callers that set it explicitly are unaffected;aws-secrets-managercallers relying on the default still get["secret"].Tests
tests/*.tftest.hclfor both modules with a mockednullplatformprovider, same shape asnullplatform/metrics: payload assertions for every type,lambda_associationspresent/absent, and negative cases (expect_failures) for an unknown event,tieron Secrets Manager and an unknown type.test-nullplatform-modulesjob.Verification
tofu validateandtofu fmt -checkclean on both. Hand-written README sections updated; the inputs tables are left to the docs bot.Compatibility
No breaking change. Every existing caller of either module produces the same payload after this PR.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code