fix: Defined dependencies: RAM_share_accepter<-TGW<-AWS_route

[yyarmoshyk]

Description

Defined dependencies: aws_ram_resource_share_accepter<-aws_ec2_transit_gateway_vpc_attachment<-aws_route.this

Motivation and Context

I was using this module to wire the transit gateway from one account to another (peer account) and the code fails to create route table in peer VPC because of the missing resource ordering. It creates route table in peering VPC before accepting the RAM share and TGW attachment to the VPC.

Terragrunt apply fails with the following error:

module.tgw.aws_route.this["rtb-111111"]: Still creating... [4m50s elapsed]
╷
│ Error: creating EC2 Transit Gateway VPC Attachment: InvalidTransitGatewayID.NotFound: Transit Gateway tgw-111111111 was deleted or does not exist.
│ 	status code: 400, request id: 92dda22e-9e61-43e6-bab7-e2fe1744f0d0
│ 
│   with module.tgw.aws_ec2_transit_gateway_vpc_attachment.this["dev"],
│   on .terraform/modules/tgw/main.tf line 66, in resource "aws_ec2_transit_gateway_vpc_attachment" "this":
│   66: resource "aws_ec2_transit_gateway_vpc_attachment" "this" {
│ 
╵
╷
│ Error: creating Route in Route Table (rtb-111111) with destination (0.0.0.0/0): InvalidTransitGatewayID.NotFound: The transitGateway ID 'tgw-08c63a2acff677f14' does not exist.
│ 	status code: 400, request id: 5ac5d791-8be1-474e-b625-a3bf95cc369b
│ 
│   with module.tgw.aws_route.this["rtb-111111"],
│   on .terraform/modules/tgw/main.tf line 113, in resource "aws_route" "this":
│  113: resource "aws_route" "this" {

Breaking Changes

No.

How Has This Been Tested?

• I have executed pre-commit run -a on my pull request
• I tested my changes on 2 customer projects with terragrunt where I was creating the transit gateway in networking account and shared it with 5 other accounts. Without this dependencies definition the terragrunt was failing with the error I mentioned initially.

[yyarmoshyk]

@antonbabenko I don't see a way to ask for review here. The previous PR I had expired and got closed automatically :)

[yyarmoshyk]

any chance to review it?

[kpankonen]

i'm not sure if you meant to add either of these changes to versions.tf in this PR, but the provider version shouldn't be set to a static version in a module