You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request. Searching for pre-existing feature requests helps us consolidate datapoints for identical requirements into a single place, thank you!
Please do not leave "+1" or other comments that do not add relevant new information or questions, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request.
If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment.
Overview of the Issue
When a deployment is updated just to update the .terraform.lock.hcl file (e.g. to get newer provider implementations that may change deployed resources), atlantis does not identify the project containing the .terraform.lock.hcl file as needing a new plan.
Reproduction Steps
Create a project with a .terraform.lock.hcl and some terraform
Create a PR just to change the .terraform.lock.hcl and no other .tf files
Note that when atlantis runs on the PR, it detects 0 projects needing new plans
However, running terraform plan manually on the command line may show that there are changed resources.
Logs
N/A
Environment details
N/A
Additional Context
N/A
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Community Note
Overview of the Issue
When a deployment is updated just to update the .terraform.lock.hcl file (e.g. to get newer provider implementations that may change deployed resources), atlantis does not identify the project containing the .terraform.lock.hcl file as needing a new plan.
Reproduction Steps
terraform plan
manually on the command line may show that there are changed resources.Logs
N/A
Environment details
N/A
Additional Context
N/A
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: