packages: expose iac_blueprints and provider_permissions in manifest structs

[jeniawhite]

iac_blueprints and provider_permissionsare being added to the package-spec
(elastic/package-spec#1209, elastic/package-spec#1180). Adding to the registry's Go manifest structs to include
them, so the fields would appear in the JSON API responses.

This adds the necessary Go types (IaCBlueprint, ProviderPermission,
ProviderRole, PermissionEntry) and wires them into all four levels where the
spec allows the fields:

• Package (package-level)
• PolicyTemplate (policy-template-level)
• Input (input-level, datastream.go)
• DataStream (data-stream-level, datastream.go)

All fields are omitempty so there is no impact on existing packages that don't
declare them.

[github-actions]

TL;DR

The Buildkite lint job failed because the PR introduces Go formatting drift in packages/datastream.go and packages/package.go; the repository formatting check reports both files as needing updates.

Remediation

• Run gofmt -w packages/datastream.go packages/package.go and commit the resulting alignment changes.
• Re-run .buildkite/scripts/lint.sh (or the repository mage check) before pushing.

Investigation details

Root Cause

The new IaCBlueprints and ProviderPermissions fields are not formatted with gofmt in the changed struct declarations. The affected declarations are in packages/datastream.go (the DataStream and Input structs) and packages/package.go (the Package and PolicyTemplate structs).

Evidence

• Build: https://buildkite.com/elastic/package-registry/builds/2315
• Job/step: :golangci-lint: Checks formatting / linting
• Key log excerpt: packages/datastream.go: needs update and packages/package.go: needs update, followed by Error: running "git update-index --refresh" failed with exit code 1.

Verification

No tests were run because the lint job stopped at the formatting check.

---

What is this? | From workflow: PR Buildkite Detective

Give us feedback! React with 🚀 if perfect, 👍 if helpful, 👎 if not.

[infra-vault-gh-plugin-prod]

💚 Build Succeeded

• Buildkite Build
• Commit: 033ffb5

History

• 💚 Build #2321 succeeded 7751c60
• 💔 Build #2315 failed dc84fc2

[bhapas]

Minor question. LGTM otherwise

[bhapas]

How do these Conditions look like? Can we type safe them? Like if spec defines them in a specific format then a typed struct probably is good.

[teresaromero]

hi, thanks for the PR.

Couple comments:

• please add a changelog entry under [unreleased] and the relevant category
• as this is a new field optional, please provide some test fixtures with these fields, and regenerate the snapshots so the new fields are tested (testdata/packages)

you can find more here https://github.com/elastic/package-registry#development - let me know if you need further help

[bhapas]

please add a changelog entry under [unreleased] and the relevant category
as this is a new field optional, please provide some test fixtures with these fields, and regenerate the snapshots so the new fields are tested (testdata/packages)

@teresaromero
Can the CI catch these stuff jsut so things don't get missed up in future?

[teresaromero]

@bhapas

Can the CI catch these stuff jsut so things don't get missed up in future?

We do have some workflows in other repos to control this and we are working on improving contribution docs so external contributors have a better experience. For the time being, we catch this things via pr-review. Things get missed up all the time and this is not a bad thing, its expected.