This message was deleted.
# generals
sparse-intern-71089
10/08/2021, 3:56 AMThis message was deleted.
l
little-cartoon-10569
10/08/2021, 4:08 AMIt seems like you're asking to get access to a known constant ("mygroup1") via something that you know in advance will be an output (mygroup.name).
little-cartoon-10569
10/08/2021, 4:09 AMThe problem goes away by changing the formal parameter list to your example function from
grantAcctionRole(role: aws.iam.Role, group: aws.iamGroup)grantAcctionRole(roleName: string, role: aws.iam.Role, groupName: string, group: aws.iam.Group)little-cartoon-10569
10/08/2021, 4:10 AMOr alternatively, changing from
grantAssumeRole()createRoleAndTrustedGroups()little-cartoon-10569
10/08/2021, 4:11 AMI've helped quite a few people solve this issue in the past, and there hasn't yet been a case where using the original string hasn't been possible.
little-cartoon-10569
10/08/2021, 4:12 AMAnd of course, by using a simple string instead of an output (or something generated from an output), everything is going to be more efficient. Fewer outputs to resolve.
r
refined-appointment-5884
10/08/2021, 4:22 AMI get that I could provide the names everywhere, along with the instances. But it soon becomes insane to have to carry over all these names all over the place, while in a lot of cases, the resource itself would be sufficient.
It also severely limits generic code, since you don't always know the group or role name. Imagine you retrieve the role from a higher level function, say you have
createLambdaFunction()refined-appointment-5884
10/08/2021, 4:23 AMAlso note that I don't think there is a need to access the physical name, such as role.name. Having access to the logical name is enough, and that should not require a resolve right?
2 Views