Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Resource type: openid_user_realm_role_protocol_mapper #160

Closed
mircea-pavel-anton opened this issue Sep 13, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Resource type: openid_user_realm_role_protocol_mapper #160

mircea-pavel-anton opened this issue Sep 13, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@mircea-pavel-anton
Copy link

I am working on converting some Terraform manifests over to crossplane. I have a resource of this type:

https://registry.terraform.io/providers/mrparkers/keycloak/latest/docs/resources/openid_user_realm_role_protocol_mapper

I did not manage to find it while looking through the docs. Is it not supported?

@mircea-pavel-anton
Copy link
Author

I managed to find an example in the documentation. Apparently it's a generic protocol mapper which we have to configure to cover different usecases:

apiVersion: client.keycloak.crossplane.io/v1alpha1
kind: ProtocolMapper
metadata:
  name: openid-role-mapper
spec:
  forProvider:
    clientId: another-openid-client
    config:
      claim.name: roles
      multivalued: "true"
    name: role-mapper
    protocol: openid-connect
    protocolMapper: oidc-usermodel-realm-role-mapper
    realmId: another-realm
  providerConfigRef:
    name: keycloak-provider-config

link: https://marketplace.upbound.io/providers/crossplane-contrib/provider-keycloak/v1.4.0/resources/client.keycloak.crossplane.io/ProtocolMapper/v1alpha1

@Breee
Copy link
Collaborator

Breee commented Sep 20, 2024

Hey man, sorry for the radio silence, i'm in the process of moving to a different location.
So far only the generic one is implemented, but we could implement other ones as well.

@mircea-pavel-anton
Copy link
Author

@Breee

No worries! Apparently I didn't read the docs carefully enough so that's on me

So far only the generic one is implemented, but we could implement other ones as well

I'm not entirely sure that's necessary. There is currently a way to achieve the same result and it is in fact documented. I wouldn't say this is a high priority item on the to-do list
Sure, the UX could be a bit better, since at least to me it wasn't obvious from the start, but again, it is in fact documented

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants