Add note on app.ContainerApp API versions and KV secrets

[thomas11]

Prompted by #3243. When creating a ContainerApp referencing a Key Vault secret via URL, Azure can at least sometimes respond with "invalid: value or keyVaultUrl and identity should be provided". This is a bug in the particular API version we use as default.

This PR adds a warning and a pointer later API versions to the registry docs.

[github-actions]

Does the PR have any schema changes?

Looking good! No breaking changes found.
No new resources/functions.

[danielrbradley]

This looks helpful.

Out of interest, have we tried bumping the default version just to see if it's compatible?

[thomas11]

Out of interest, have we tried bumping the default version just to see if it's compatible?

I ran this, indicating that it's not.

❯ schema-tools squeeze -s bin/schema-full.json --old azure-native:app:ContainerApp --new azure-native:app/v20230501:ContainerApp
Found 2 breaking changes:
Resource "azure-native:app/v20230501:ContainerApp" missing input "workloadProfileType"
Resource "azure-native:app/v20230501:ContainerApp" missing output "workloadProfileType"

[danielrbradley]

Out of interest, have we tried bumping the default version just to see if it's compatible?

I ran this, indicating that it's not.

❯ schema-tools squeeze -s bin/schema-full.json --old azure-native:app:ContainerApp --new azure-native:app/v20230501:ContainerApp
Found 2 breaking changes:
Resource "azure-native:app/v20230501:ContainerApp" missing input "workloadProfileType"
Resource "azure-native:app/v20230501:ContainerApp" missing output "workloadProfileType"

Great, thanks for confirming!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 55.33%. Comparing base (a1d5194) to head (af586ec).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #3284   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   55.33%   55.33%           
=======================================
  Files          66       66           
  Lines        9930     9930           
=======================================
  Hits         5495     5495           
  Misses       4001     4001           
  Partials      434      434           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[mikhailshilkov]

If we find that the default version is broken in some meaningful way, I would support us bumping it up to a better version even with minor breaking changes. It's a trade-off, but if we can take a closer look at what happened with workloadProfileType and confirm it's not reducing the functionality, I think a minor break is worth to fix the defaults.

Side note: please add some description to the PR. I know it feels like busywork, but I'd really want to encourage us to keep a high bar on PR text quality.

[thomas11]

If we find that the default version is broken in some meaningful way, I would support us bumping it up to a better version even with minor breaking changes. It's a trade-off, but if we can take a closer look at what happened with workloadProfileType and confirm it's not reducing the functionality, I think a minor break is worth to fix the defaults.

The difference in the spec is that workloadProfileType was replaced by workloadProfileName. Both are simple strings, but their sets of allowed values seem to be different based on the examples: "workloadProfileType": "GeneralPurpose" vs "workloadProfileName": "My-GP-01". Here are the valid names per current docs.

So, seems like changing the API version would require everyone to update their code, not only changing the property name but also looking up the correct value. On the positive side, it's limited to that one property.

[thomas11]

Addendum: v3 of the provider is also not too far away. Overall, we've decided to leave the API version as-is.