Deprecation: Use of property_name inside of actions (CHEF-19)

In Chef Infra Client 12.5.1, the custom resources API allowed specifying property names as the short form of property_name inside of actions, instead of the long form of new_resource.property_name (as was previously required in provider code in LWRPs/HWRPs/etc). That change caused unsolvable namespace clashes and will be removed in Chef Infra Client 14.0, and it will become mandatory to refer to properties as new_resource.property_name in actions.

Example

This code worked in Chef Infra Client 12.5.1 and later revisions up to Chef Client 13.0:

property :my_content, String

action :doit do
  file '/tmp/file.xy' do
    content my_content
  end
end

Remediation

The my_content reference will no longer be wired up automatically to the new_resource object and users will need to specify new_resource.my_content explicitly:

property :my_content, String

action :doit do
  file '/tmp/file.xy' do
    content new_resource.my_content
  end
end

Note

In some edge cases, this deprecation warning may mention that the property should be referred to as current_resource.property_name instead of new_resource.property_name, which isn’t a mistake; the user should instead use the current_resource.property_name to preserve prior behavior, or should modify their code to explicitly check the current_resource if the new_resource isn’t set. There are several possible remediations to this in the order of least complicated to the most compatible with the old behavior, and the user will need to select what works best for their use case:

content_to_set = new_resource.property_name || current_resource.property_name
content_to_set = new_resource.property_name.nil? ? current_resource.property_name : new_resource.property_name
content_to_set = new_resource.property_is_set?(:property_name) ? new_resource.property_name : current_resource.property_name

Unfortunately, if you were reliant upon the old code’s automatic switching between the new_resource and current_resource you will need to be explicit. Most users, however, weren’t aware that this was occurring and moving that uncommon logic explicitly into the action code will produce more comprehensible code that’s less reliant on subtle tricks of the API.

It’s also entirely possible that the access of the current_resource was never intended by the user. If this behavior was undesired, the correct remediation would be to simply access the property through the new_resource.property_name. We can’t determine and accurately report to the user when this deprecation message is incorrect, we can only report on compatible behavior. The suggestion of the deprecation warning to access the property through current_resource.property_name may be incorrect, and it’s up to the discretion of the user to choose the appropriate remediation for their needs.

The fact that this is confusing behavior to explain is why it’s being removed.

Rationale

The change in Chef Infra Client 12.5.1 caused several insolvable problems. One of the worst was that properties would override DSL commands so that (for example) if a user had a template property they could no longer use the template resource:

property :template, String

action :doit do
  template '/tmp/file.xy' do # this would NOT create a template resource but would pass a string and a block to the template property
    source 'file.xy.erb'
    variables({ stuff: 'whatever' })
  end
end

The highly confusing workaround for this problem was to use declare_resource to avoid the use of the resource DSL:

property :template, String

action :doit do
  declare_resource(:template, '/tmp/file.xy') do # now there is no ambiguity and we create a template resource
    source 'file.xy.erb'
    variables({ stuff: 'whatever' })
  end
end

This also caused issues when properties conflicted with properties on subresources, where this example is ambiguous as to if the content argument to content refers to the file subresource content property, or if it refers to the parent custom resource content property.

property :content, String

action :doit do
  puts "content: #{content}"
  file '/tmp/file.xy' do
    content content
  end
end

In fact, the subprocess wins (because it has to) and this code will result in the content always being nil and the file being empty. The output of the puts debugging will be correct, however, since content is being accessed outside of the file resource scope so it acquires it from the new_resource implicitly (in Chef Infra Client 12.5.1 and Chef Client 13.x)

The way to remediate that’s by specifying the new_resource:

property :content, String

action :doit do
  file '/tmp/file.xy' do
    content new_resource.content
  end
end

We’re now enforcing this as the correct way to write resources.

Note that this namespace collision between custom resources and subresources occurs with properties that aren’t also being immediately used, and so this fails as well:

property :mode, String

action :doit do
  file '/tmp/file.xy' do
    content mode # this accesses the mode property on the file resource rather than the mode property on the outer resource
  end
end

This will also cause namespace collisions if at some point in the future a new property is introduced to a subresource.

property :spiffyness, String

action :doit do
  file '/tmp/file.xy' do
    content spiffyness
  end
end

This will work fine today, but if at some point in the future the file resource grows a spiffyness property, then this will cause a namespace collision with the custom resource and will result in the custom resource failing. This is avoided by the explicit use of new_resource:

property :spiffyness, String

action :doit do
  file '/tmp/file.xy' do
    content new_resource.spiffyness # we're always referring to the outer custom resource's spiffiness property
  end
end