docs: clarify transit_encryption_enabled support for aws_elasticache_cluster

[Rohitpr05]

Rollback Plan

If this change needs to be reverted, restoring the previous documentation will return the original behavior. This is a documentation-only change.

Changes to Security Controls

None. This is a documentation-only change.

Description

Updates the aws_elasticache_cluster documentation to remove the incorrect Redis OSS version compatibility guidance for transit_encryption_enabled.

The documentation now clarifies that Redis OSS users should configure transit_encryption_enabled using the aws_elasticache_replication_group resource.

Relations

Closes #49066

References

N/A

Output from Acceptance Testing

Not applicable. Documentation-only change.

[github-actions]

Community Guidelines

This comment is added to every new Pull Request to provide quick reference to how the Terraform AWS Provider is maintained. Please review the information below, and thank you for contributing to the community that keeps the provider thriving! 🚀

Voting for Prioritization

• Please vote on this Pull Request by adding a 👍 reaction to the original post to help the community and maintainers prioritize it.
• Please see our prioritization guide for additional information on how the maintainers handle prioritization.
• Please do not leave +1 or other comments that do not add relevant new information or questions; they generate extra noise for others following the Pull Request and do not help prioritize the request.

Pull Request Authors

• Review the contribution guide relating to the type of change you are making to ensure all of the necessary steps have been taken.
• Whether or not the branch has been rebased will not impact prioritization, but doing so is always a welcome surprise.

[justinretzolk]

Hey @Rohitpr05 👋🏻 Thank you very much for taking the time to raise this! In this case, it looks like #49114 has some additional changes (specifically, it implements additional validation for the resource) in addition to the documentation fix that you're proposing here. With that in mind, I'm going to close this PR in favor of that one, but if you have additional contributions you'd like to implement in the future, we'd be more than happy to take a look!

[github-actions]

Warning

This Issue has been closed, meaning that any additional comments are much easier for the maintainers to miss. Please assume that the maintainers will not see them.

Ongoing conversations amongst community members are welcome, however, the issue will be locked after 30 days. Moving conversations to another venue, such as the AWS Provider forum, is recommended. If you have additional concerns, please open a new issue, referencing this one where needed.