azurerm_storage_account/azurerm_storage_account_blob_properties/azurerm_storage_account_queue_properties/azurerm_storage_account_share_properties/azurerm_storage_account_static_website_properties - split data plane into separate resources

[WodansSon]

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

‼️ IMPORTAINT ‼️: This PR must be included into the last v3.x provider before the v4.0 release.

NEW FEATURES FLAG:

• data_plane_access_on_read_enabled

NEW RESOURCES:

• azurerm_storage_account_blob_properties
• azurerm_storage_account_queue_properties
• azurerm_storage_account_share_properties
• azurerm_storage_account_static_website_properties

EXISTING RESOURCES BEHAVIOR UPDATED:

• azurerm_storage_account - deprecated blob_properties, share_properties, queue_properties and static_website code blocks for create

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 relevent 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)

• NOTE: The TestAccStorageAccount_disappears test case fails in main as well.

Change Log

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

FEATURES:

• New Resource: azurerm_storage_account_blob_properties [GH-00000]
• New Resource: azurerm_storage_account_queue_properties [GH-00000]
• New Resource: azurerm_storage_account_share_properties [GH-00000]
• New Resource: azurerm_storage_account_static_website_properties [GH-00000]

ENHANCEMENTS:

• provider: support for the feature flag data_plane_access_on_read_enabled [GH-00000]

DEPRECATIONS:

• azurerm_storage_account - deprecated blob_properties, share_properties, queue_properties and static_website code blocks for create [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 #2977

Note

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

[jackofallops]

I think you have an erroneous , here...

Suggested change

	},
	}

[WodansSon]

I have removed the breaking-change label from this PR as it is not really a breaking change per se. Pre-existing storage accounts will still be able to be managed as they always have. This change is more a change in behavior of the resource for net new storage accounts.

The review comments have been addressed for the v3.x provider. Reviewers comments will be fully addressed in the v4.0 version of this PR...

[jkroepke]

@WodansSon tables have a similar issue with data plane requirement. Could you include them as well? #15083

[github-actions]

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.