feat: add order to coder_metadata by BrunoQuaresma · Pull Request #450 · coder/terraform-provider-coder

BrunoQuaresma · 2025-10-21T17:20:56Z

Closes #325

johnstcn · 2025-10-21T19:26:52Z

provider/metadata.go

+							Type:        schema.TypeInt,
+							Description: "The order determines the position of item in the UI presentation. The lowest order is shown first and items with equal order are sorted by key (ascending order).",
+							ForceNew:    true,
+							Computed:    true,


If you set Computed on an attribute, it cannot be changed. Ref: https://developer.hashicorp.com/terraform/plugin/sdkv2/schemas/schema-behaviors#computed

johnstcn

You will need to update the tests and run make fmt / make gen in order for CI to pass.
My suggestion would also be to add/update tests in ./integration for this change.

BrunoQuaresma · 2025-10-22T17:17:33Z

@johnstcn I have updated the TestMetadata to include one item with the order attribute and added a check(you can check the "Files changed" tab), but it is not working 😞

Error:      	Not equal: 
								expected: "4"
								actual  : "0"

Do you have any idea why?

BrunoQuaresma · 2025-10-22T17:36:08Z

@johnstcn about adding an integration test for this, I think this change is simple enough to be tested only in the TestMetadata, but I would like to understand why you think an integration test for this would be necessary.

johnstcn · 2025-10-23T08:10:47Z

I would like to understand why you think an integration test for this would be necessary.

Purely out of paranoia, but it's only a suggestion.

provider/metadata.go

mtojek · 2025-10-23T08:59:31Z

provider/metadata_test.go

 					item {
 						key = "foo"
 						value = "bar"
+						order = 4


Can you add more test cases?

All items have order present.

Order is negative.

Only a few items have order present

I think we can have 1 and 3 on the same test. We can just add orders to all the items and leave one empty and check if it is set to 0(the expected default value).

About 2, I don't see we handling that in any other part of the provider for app or agent metadata order, but putting some thoughts on that, I think it should not be a problem since you can still sort things by negative numbers.

mtojek · 2025-10-23T09:02:17Z

provider/metadata.go

+						"order": {
+							Type:        schema.TypeInt,
+							Description: "The order determines the position of item in the UI presentation. The lowest order is shown first and items with equal order are sorted by key (ascending order).",
+							ForceNew:    true,


Hm... is ForceNew necessary @johnstcn ?

I'm not 100% sure, but it is already used in agent.metadata.order so it may be no harm to be safe and stick to the status quo.

mtojek · 2025-10-23T09:12:43Z

provider/metadata_test.go

 					"item.0.key":       "foo",
 					"item.0.value":     "bar",
 					"item.0.sensitive": "false",
+					"item.0.order":     "4",


BTW this is not enough for metadata items. See the comment on top of this function.

PS. VS code debugger is very handy when dealing with Terraform schema.

BrunoQuaresma · 2025-10-23T16:24:02Z

@johnstcn related to the integration tests, what minVersion should I set when testing new features?

johnstcn · 2025-10-23T16:27:46Z

@johnstcn related to the integration tests, what minVersion should I set when testing new features?

If you set minVersion: "v0.0.0" then the integration test will always run.
Otherwise, the test will only run based on the version of Coder against which the integration test is actually running.

In CI, the integration tests run against three different versions (from go run ./scripts/coderversion.go):

CODER_MAINLINE_VERSION: latest mainline version
CODER_STABLE_VERSION: latest stable version
CODER_OLDSTABLE_VERSION: previous stable version

So basically if a particular integration test only makes sense to run from a particular Coder version onwards, you set minVersion to that version.

provider/metadata_test.go

johnstcn · 2025-10-23T16:35:34Z

provider/provider.go

+		return nil
+	}
+	var valueAsInt int64
+	gocty.FromCtyValue(value, &valueAsInt)


This can return an error, so we may to modify the return signature to (interface{}, error) and handle it in the calling function.

johnstcn · 2025-10-24T09:04:50Z

provider/provider.go

+func valueAsInt(value cty.Value) (interface{}, error) {
+	if value.IsNull() {
+		return nil, nil
+	}
+	var valueAsInt int64
+	err := gocty.FromCtyValue(value, &valueAsInt)
+	return valueAsInt, err
+}


With this change, it would be good to have a test for a non-numeric value for order.

mtojek

Once tests pointed our by Cian are 👍 , feel free to proceed.

BrunoQuaresma added 2 commits October 21, 2025 17:15

feat: add order to coder_metadata

0153119

improve description

51a2685

BrunoQuaresma requested a review from johnstcn October 21, 2025 17:20

BrunoQuaresma self-assigned this Oct 21, 2025

johnstcn reviewed Oct 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

replace computed field

9716cd3

BrunoQuaresma requested a review from johnstcn October 22, 2025 13:15

johnstcn requested changes Oct 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

make gen

db2d0cb

mtojek reviewed Oct 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

fix test

a7da055

BrunoQuaresma requested review from johnstcn and mtojek October 23, 2025 16:24

johnstcn reviewed Oct 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

provider/metadata_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved

johnstcn reviewed Oct 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

handle parse error

5e47b1d

BrunoQuaresma requested a review from johnstcn October 23, 2025 17:51

johnstcn reviewed Oct 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

mtojek reviewed Oct 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

BrunoQuaresma closed this Jan 7, 2026

github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 7, 2026

Conversation

BrunoQuaresma commented Oct 21, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

johnstcn left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BrunoQuaresma commented Oct 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

BrunoQuaresma commented Oct 22, 2025

Uh oh!

johnstcn commented Oct 23, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BrunoQuaresma commented Oct 23, 2025

Uh oh!

johnstcn commented Oct 23, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mtojek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

johnstcn left a comment •

edited

Loading

BrunoQuaresma commented Oct 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

johnstcn commented Oct 23, 2025 •

edited

Loading