Destroy Provisioners #11329
Destroy Provisioners #11329
Conversation
destroy provisioners.
mitchellh
force-pushed
the
f-destroy-prov
branch
from
90eeef4
to
2055885
Compare
| during updating or any other lifecycle. They are meant as a means to perform | ||
| bootstrapping of a system. | ||
|
|
||
| If a creation-time provisioner fails, the resource is marked as **tainted**. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is a good idea, but we should probably document it as a backwards compatibility change since buggy scripts that didn't exit cleanly would have been OK previously.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How so? This behavior is the same as always.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, maybe I'm mis-remembering. I was thinking a failed provisioner didn't mark the resource as tainted, and left it as-is in the state. No problem then, if nothing changed.
|
I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues. If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further. |
ghost
locked and limited conversation to collaborators
Fixes #386
I'm going to go light on the details in this PR description since there is a really good discussion and RFC in #386. You can also view the website changes in this PR to see how it works!
Highlights:
on_failureto determine behavior when a provisioner fails (works for both create and destroy provisioners)