Merge the "skip" attribute from included terragrunt files is not supported

[rodrigorfk]

Describe the bug

The current Terragrunt documentation, specifically the section on the skip attribute here, stipulates that this flag must be explicitly set within Terragrunt modules that are intended to be skipped. This implies that the configuration will not be inherited from include blocks. Despite this being clearly documented, it appears to contradict the merging concept supported by the include block.

From a user's standpoint, it would be beneficial to have the ability to inherit this flag/attribute, similar to how many other attributes are inherited. Is there a specific rationale behind the distinct treatment of this attribute that I may be overlooking?

Steps To Reproduce

Create a partial terragrunt hcl file

partial.hcl

locals {
  module_path_parts = split("/", path_relative_to_include())
  module_base_path  = local.module_path_parts[0]
  module_name       = join("_", slice(local.module_path_parts, 1, length(local.module_path_parts)))
}

skip = !endswith(local.module_name, "_account_layer")

Include the partial file in a live module

partial.hcl

include {
  path   = find_in_parent_folders("partial.hcl")
  expose = true
}

Expected behavior

As you can see, the skip in the partial terragrunt file does not contain a simple true or false, it contains a more advanced logic that I would like to inherit in included modules, without having to duplicate the logic there, currently that is not possible because the skip attribute is not included.

Nice to haves

• Terminal output
• Screenshots

Versions

• Terragrunt version: v0.59.5
• OpenTofu/Terraform version: 1.5.5
• Environment details (Ubuntu 20.04, Windows 10, etc.): macOS 14.x

Additional context

Add any other context about the problem here.

[yhakbar]

Hey @rodrigorfk ,

Thanks for opening this issue, and supplying a pull request to address your needs. Your initiative is appreciated!

We will need to take some time to review this logic, and make sure it doesn't impact anything too severely, as it is a breaking change in what's expected from an include.

To be transparent, I don't know why skips aren't included right now, but there's likely a good reason, and we want to make sure those are understood before merging anything in.

[rodrigorfk]

Hi @yhakbar, thank you very much for providing a follow up here, I completely understand the suggested changed needs some time to be evaluated, once you deliberate about it, please let me know if I can help with anything else regarding to it. Thanks again.

[yhakbar]

The context on this is that skip used to be part of a legacy terragrunt field that no longer exists. At the time, it didn't make sense to allow the skip to be included, but it's totally fine now.

How we handle skips is something that we're working on actively, and is likely to change over time, particularly if the following RFC is accepted:
#3134