changed aws_guardduty_feature additional_configuration from list to set

[joelmccoy]

Description

This changes the aws_guardduty_detector_feature additional_configuration type from a list to a set. This is so that the order of the additional configurations does not matter. Before pushing this fix, if you didn't provide the additional_configurations in the order the AWS API returns them, there would be a force replace on every terraform apply.

I added an additional acceptance test to confirm that the ordering of the additional_configurations doesn't matter and that an empty plan is returned no matter the order.

Relations

Closes #36400

References

Output from Acceptance Testing

%  AWS_PROFILE=sandbox make testacc TESTS=TestAccGuard
Duty_serial/DetectorFeature PKG=guardduty 
==> Checking that code complies with gofmt requirements...
TF_ACC=1 go1.21.8 test ./internal/service/guardduty/... -v -count 1 -parallel 20 -run='TestAccGuardDuty_serial/Detect
orFeature'  -timeout 360m
=== RUN   TestAccGuardDuty_serial
=== PAUSE TestAccGuardDuty_serial
=== CONT  TestAccGuardDuty_serial
=== RUN   TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature
=== RUN   TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature/basic
=== RUN   TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature/additional_configuration
=== RUN   TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature/additional_configuration_order
=== RUN   TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature/multiple
--- PASS: TestAccGuardDuty_serial (120.23s)
    --- PASS: TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature (120.23s)
        --- PASS: TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature/basic (15.78s)
        --- PASS: TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature/additional_configuration (45.32s)
        --- PASS: TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature/additional_configuration_order (22.66s)
        --- PASS: TestAccGuardDuty_serial/DetectorFeature/multiple (36.47s)
PASS
ok      github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-aws/internal/service/guardduty  124.516s
...

[github-actions]

Community Note

Voting for Prioritization

• Please vote on this pull request by adding a 👍 reaction to the original post to help the community and maintainers prioritize this pull request.
• Please see our prioritization guide for information on how we prioritize.
• 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.

For Submitters

• Review the contribution guide relating to the type of change you are making to ensure all of the necessary steps have been taken.
• For new resources and data sources, use skaff to generate scaffolding with comments detailing common expectations.
• Whether or not the branch has been rebased will not impact prioritization, but doing so is always a welcome surprise.

[sbkg0002]

@sharmajikabeta13 Is there a planning when this will be merged?

[icco]

@jar-b could we get this reviewed and merged? Should fix #36400 and #36695. If needed I rebased this against main: #44627