Robert Mcgregor

If we're going to do some work on this part of the code, we might also be able to address the root cause of #2334 at the same time

It looks like this was included as a part of a large refactor in https://github.com/okta/terraform-provider-okta/pull/1650 Its possible this was included unintentionally, which would explain it's omission from the release notes

> For example, this seems like an obvious "bad" usage of for_each, because a [dynamic block](https://developer.hashicorp.com/terraform/language/expressions/dynamic-blocks) achieves the same without clobbering other group assignments: ```hcl resource "okta_app_bookmark" "this" { label...

@duytiennguyen-okta any chance I could trouble you for a code review on this one?

Hey @monde, No bug here, this is just a general refactor My understanding is that we'd want to move to plugin-framework for a `v5`? If we action #2208 I think...

> [@exitcode0](https://github.com/exitcode0) , but isn't the apps getting attached to the default Auth policy? Yes, but when the user doesn't provide a policy ID, the provider attempts lookup the ID...

I think the behaviour that @tduong10101 is expecting here is as follows If the resource is not in state we should check if the resource exists before running create() or...

Something like this should work for you you might still run into this other reported bug https://github.com/okta/terraform-provider-okta/issues/1991 ```hcl data "okta_org_metadata" "_" {} locals { org_uri = data.okta_org_metadata._.domains["organization"] org_url = replace(local.org_uri,...

> The downside - there is a permadiff for okta_resource_set.support_cases.resources, as provider assumes it is always null: This is related to this issue #2224

Hey @aditya-okta or @pranav-okta, Could I please ask you to approve the Github Workflow run for this PR so the Github Checks can run? 🙏