azurerm_resource_provider_registration - implement additional pollers and update existing ones to account for inconsistency in API

[sreallymatt]

Community Note

• Please vote on this PR by adding a 👍 reaction to the original PR to help the community and maintainers prioritize for review
• Please do not leave comments along the lines of "+1", "me too" or "any updates", they generate extra noise for PR followers and do not help prioritize for review

Description

This API is highly inconsistent, essentially every request we make needs to be wrapped in pollers or retries for this to function as expected.

Adds:

• Poller for Read, Update, and Import GET requests, allowing up to 10 retries before erroring out or removing the resource from state

Updates:

• Read default timeout to 15m given the polling in some cases can add a significant delay
• ResourceProviderRegistrationPoller:
  • Now accepts a desired RegistrationState as input so it can be reused for unregistering
  • Checks for continuous target occurrences (During testing I encountered as many as 8 continuous Registered states followed by a Registering state, so settled on 10 for the default target)
  • TestAccResourceProviderRegistration_feature now runs in our alt subscription to prevent unregistering an RP that may be used by other tests which could cause failures.

Removes:

• ResourceProviderUnregistrationPoller in favour of modified ResourceProviderRegistrationPoller given the code was identical except for the RegistrationState being checked

Note: for the provider level RP registrations I configured the poller for a single continuous occurrence (i.e. the second response matching the expected state will mark it as successful), this prevents the provider from hanging for a long time if it's registering many RPs at once (e.g. on a new subscription) - As far as I can tell this shouldn't cause any problems, but this can be revisited if it does.

PR Checklist

• I have followed the guidelines in our Contributing Documentation.
• I have checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change.
• I have checked if my changes close any open issues. If so please include appropriate closing keywords below.
• I have updated/added Documentation as required written in a helpful and kind way to assist users that may be unfamiliar with the resource / data source.
• I have used a meaningful PR title to help maintainers and other users understand this change and help prevent duplicate work.
  For example: “resource_name_here - description of change e.g. adding property new_property_name_here”

Changes to existing Resource / Data Source

• I have added an explanation of what my changes do and why I'd like you to include them (This may be covered by linking to an issue above, but may benefit from additional explanation).
• I have written new tests for my resource or datasource changes & updated any relevant documentation.
• I have successfully run tests with my changes locally. If not, please provide details on testing challenges that prevented you running the tests.
• (For changes that include a state migration only). I have manually tested the migration path between relevant versions of the provider.

Testing

• My submission includes Test coverage as described in the Contribution Guide and the tests pass. (if this is not possible for any reason, please include details of why you did or could not add test coverage)

Change Log

Below please provide what should go into the changelog (if anything) conforming to the Changelog Format documented here.

• azurerm_resource - support for the thing1 property [GH-00000]

This is a (please select all that apply):

• Bug Fix
• New Feature (ie adding a service, resource, or data source)
• Enhancement
• Breaking Change

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #31079

AI Assistance Disclosure

• AI Assisted - This contribution was made by, or with the assistance of, AI/LLMs

Rollback Plan

If a change needs to be reverted, we will publish an updated version of the provider.

Changes to Security Controls

Are there any changes to security controls (access controls, encryption, logging) in this pull request? If so, explain.

Note

If this PR changes meaningfully during the course of review please update the title and description as required.

[mbfrahry]

LGTM