Skip to content

deps(terraform): upgrade providers, modules & pinned tool versions#127

Closed
oferk0 wants to merge 1 commit into
CloudGeometry:mainfrom
oferk0:deps/terraform
Closed

deps(terraform): upgrade providers, modules & pinned tool versions#127
oferk0 wants to merge 1 commit into
CloudGeometry:mainfrom
oferk0:deps/terraform

Conversation

@oferk0

@oferk0 oferk0 commented Jun 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Pins previously-unpinned providers and bumps to latest stable; every module/root verified with terraform init -upgrade + validate.

Providers: azurerm 3→4, google 5→6, harbor/sonarqube/restapi/vault now pinned, github 5→6, gitlab 18→19, kubernetes/random bumped. const.py: terraform 1.6.4→1.15.6, kubectl→1.33.13.
Modules: EKS 19→20 (aws-auth ConfigMap → Access Entries), VPC →5.21.

Breaking-change fixes: azurerm-4 subnet/AKS arg renames; gitlab-19 issues_enabledissues_access_level and allowed_to_push block→attribute.

Held (avoid unverifiable rewrites): aws stays 5.x (EKS v20 caps <6), google 6.x (GKE module caps <7), IAM module v5.

⚠️ validate-only — no live plan. The EKS Access-Entry migration needs a reviewed plan before apply.

Pin previously-unpinned providers and bump everything to latest stable
within the constraints validated below. Each root/module was verified with
terraform init -upgrade + terraform validate (1.8.2 locally).

Providers:
- aws: pin to >= 5.0, < 6.0 (latest 5.100). Held at 5.x because EKS module
  v20 requires aws < 6.0; aws 6.x needs EKS v21 (declined as too risky).
- azurerm ~>3.86 -> ~> 4.0 (4.78). Fixed v4 breaking changes: subnet
  private_endpoint_network_policies_enabled (bool) -> private_endpoint_
  network_policies ("Disabled"); AKS enable_auto_scaling/enable_host_
  encryption/enable_node_public_ip -> *_enabled renames; removed the now-
  implicit  arg from azure_active_directory_role_based_access_control;
  key_vault enable_rbac_authorization -> rbac_authorization_enabled.
- google ~>5.45 -> ~> 6.0 (6.50). Held at 6.x because the pinned GKE module
  (kubernetes-engine 34.0.0) caps google < 7.0; google 7 needs the 34->44
  module rewrite (mirrors the EKS-v21 decision).
- harbor / sonarqube / restapi / vault: were unpinned; pinned to ~> 3.0 /
  ~> 0.16 / ~> 3.0 / ~> 5.0 (latest majors).
- kubernetes >= 2.10 -> >= 2.20, < 4.0 (resolves to 3.2).
- random ~>3.5.1 -> ~> 3.9.
- github provider 5.42 -> 6.0, gitlab provider 18.2 -> 19.1 (via const.py).
  Fixed gitlab v19 breaking changes in the repository module: gitlab_project
  issues_enabled -> issues_access_level; gitlab_branch_protection
  allowed_to_push nested block -> list attribute.

Modules:
- EKS module ~>19.16 -> ~> 20.37. Migrated off the removed create/manage_aws_
  auth_configmap to authentication_mode = API_AND_CONFIG_MAP +
  enable_cluster_creator_admin_permissions (Access Entries). IAM IRSA module
  held at ~>5.58 (v6 requires aws >= 6.28, incompatible with EKS v20 + aws 5).
- VPC module ~> 5.0 -> ~> 5.21.

CLI const.py: TERRAFORM_VERSION 1.6.4 -> 1.15.6, KUBECTL_VERSION 1.33.1 ->
1.33.13 (cluster default is 1.32; kubectl stays within +1 skew).

NOTE: validate-only. The AWS/Azure/GCP modules cannot be terraform-plan'd
without live cloud credentials + state; the EKS v20 Access Entry migration
in particular needs a reviewed plan before apply.
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jun 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@oferk0, we couldn't start this review because you've reached your PR review rate limit.

More reviews will be available in 59 minutes and 44 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work.

Your organization has used up its prepaid credits, and credit purchases are no longer available. Enable the review add-on in the billing tab to keep reviews running — you're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based credits.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan refill rate.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses rolling per-developer review limits. Reviews become available again as older review attempts age out of the rolling limit window.

Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 6b576b0e-b3ae-40c9-bb18-02e4e60f51a6

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between eaa528a and b6d8859.

📒 Files selected for processing (12)
  • platform/terraform/core_services/main.tf
  • platform/terraform/modules/cloud_aws/eks.tf
  • platform/terraform/modules/cloud_aws/versions.tf
  • platform/terraform/modules/cloud_aws/vpc.tf
  • platform/terraform/modules/cloud_azure/aks.tf
  • platform/terraform/modules/cloud_azure/key_vault.tf
  • platform/terraform/modules/cloud_azure/main.tf
  • platform/terraform/modules/cloud_azure/network.tf
  • platform/terraform/modules/cloud_gcp/main.tf
  • platform/terraform/modules/vcs_gitlab/repository/main.tf
  • platform/terraform/secrets/main.tf
  • tools/cli/common/const/const.py
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@oferk0

oferk0 commented Jun 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Superseded: re-pointed at the deps/modernization integration branch instead of main directly. See umbrella PR #131 (per-layer review preserved as oferk0#1–5).

@oferk0 oferk0 closed this Jun 23, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant