IPL-9014 Support name and provider when unconventional display identifier

[jillirami]

Description

This pull request enhances the tfe_registry_module resource to support explicit name and module_provider fields when using a VCS repository with a source_directory. This is especially useful for monorepos or repositories that do not follow the standard terraform-<provider>-<name> naming convention. The changes ensure that both name and module_provider are required in these cases, improve validation logic, update documentation, and add comprehensive test coverage for these scenarios.

Enhancements to tfe_registry_module resource:

• Added support for specifying name and module_provider alongside vcs_repo with source_directory, enabling registration of modules from monorepos or non-standard repository names. [1] [2]
• Introduced a new validation function (validateNameAndProvider) to enforce that both name and module_provider are provided when the repository name does not follow the terraform-<provider>-<name> convention and source_directory is set. [1] [2]

Schema and validation updates:

• Removed the restriction that only one of vcs_repo or module_provider can be specified, allowing their combined use when required.
• Updated error messages and validation logic in acceptance tests to reflect the new requirements for name and module_provider. [1] [2] [3] [4]

Documentation improvements:

• Added a new example and detailed explanation for creating a registry module from a monorepo with source_directory, highlighting the need to specify both name and module_provider.
• Clarified documentation on the usage and requirements of module_provider and name fields.

Test coverage:

• Added new acceptance tests for monorepos with non-standard names and updated existing tests to cover the new validation logic and resource behavior. [1] [2]

Remember to:

• Update the Change Log
• Update the Documentation

Testing plan

resource "tfe_registry_module" "monorepo" {
  organization    = tfe_organization.example.name
  name            = "test"
  module_provider = "aws"

  vcs_repo {
    display_identifier = var.github_registry_module_identifier
    identifier         = var.github_registry_module_identifier
    oauth_token_id     = tfe_oauth_client.github.oauth_token_id
    branch             = var.github_registry_module_branch
    tags               = false
    source_directory   = "modules/null"
  }
}

External links

• JIRA
• Related PR
• Related JIRA

Output from acceptance tests

Please run applicable acceptance tests locally and include the output here. See testing.md to learn how to run acceptance tests.

jillianne.ramirez@jillianne terraform-provider-tfe % go test -v -run TestAccTFERegistryModule_monorepoNonStandardName ./internal/provider/
=== RUN   TestAccTFERegistryModule_monorepoNonStandardName
--- PASS: TestAccTFERegistryModule_monorepoNonStandardName (7.05s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-tfe/internal/provider	7.925s

go test -v -run TestAccTFERegistryModule_monorepoNonStandardNameWithoutNameandProvider ./internal/provider/
=== RUN   TestAccTFERegistryModule_monorepoNonStandardNameWithoutNameandProvider
--- PASS: TestAccTFERegistryModule_monorepoNonStandardNameWithoutNameandProvider (0.66s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-tfe/internal/provider	1.620s

Rollback Plan

Changes to Security Controls

[jillirami]

Required to be removed because this prevents having both vcs_repo AND module_provider which we need to support monorepo scenarios with source_directory

[datadog-terraform-cloud-hashicorp]

⚠️ Tests

✨ Fix all issues with Cursor

⚠️ Warnings

❄️ 1 New flaky test detected

TestAccTFEWorkspace_paginatedRemoteStateConsumers from resource_tfe_workspace_test.go (Datadog) (Fix with Cursor)

Step 1/1 error: After applying this test step, the refresh plan was not empty.
stdout


Terraform used the selected providers to generate the following execution
plan. Resource actions are indicated with the following symbols:
  ~ update in-place

Terraform will perform the following actions:

...

ℹ️ Info

🧪 All tests passed

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: af38c9e | Docs | Was this helpful? Give us feedback!}

[jillirami]

Failures observed in CI will be resolved with hashicorp/go-tfe#1283 and #1975

[brandonc]

Ideally speaking, could you add a test for the error case where the convention is not followed and no name or provider is given? That's not blocking feedback, though.

[brandonc]

This prohibits dashes in the module name, which I think are valid

I think you may need to check for at least 3 parts

Suggested change

	nameParts := strings.Split(repoName, "-")
	followsConvention := len(nameParts) == 3
	nameParts := strings.SplitN(repoName, "-", 3)
	followsConvention := len(nameParts) == 3

[jillirami]

Thank you for noticing this - atlas will follow-through with any additional validation as well. I will merge your suggestion along with that negative test case.

[brandonc]

perhaps the first part should must be "terraform" ? Just thinking out loud and not sure it matters too much

[jillirami]

@brandonc great point, I believe here it doesn't matter for the following reasons.

Although you are 100% right we did suggest this pattern of terraform-provider-name, and even having an example that aligns in our guide docs - it is not something that is actually enforced or required in our processing of the registry module (referencing the code that processes it here).

Even in our in-app experience, we are able to create a registry module without the leading terraform