Rename Resource Groups
Need the ability to rename resource groups either via PowerShell or the new portal.
At this point our recommendation is to move resources into a new Resource Group with the new name.
Gareth Davies commented
This is a little ridiculous. There are recommendations by Microsoft to create governance processes for the Azure tenant - if you create these (specifically naming convention) after stuff has been implemented there is so much work involved in moving (even if it is possible) or recreating stacks that it is not viable to comply with your own standards. It should be possible to edit a label - there is something fundamentally wrong with the implementation if this limitation continues to exist in Azure.
Seth Derrick commented
It is ludicrous that there is so much pushback from Microsoft on this request. All resources can't be moved. Which means Microsoft is now asking people to completely recreate resources from scratch in a new group. That's not a less than optimal work around; that's a non-viable suggestion.
Fix this Microsoft!
Grotheer, Matt commented
Since there are a number of services that cannot be moved to new resource groups (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-resource-manager/resource-group-move-resources), what is the recommended way to do this?
Tom Schulte (Plex Systems) commented
My guess is MS has designed things so that the name is a key. I see the name used in URLs, such as in the Action for calling a LA from an LA. I feel I have seen this in other Azure resources. It may be hard to rectify on the MS end which is why a user-defined value such as this should not be used as a key identifier.
I,too, would like a more detailed explanation. Seeing the high vote count, that seems appropriated.
Sean Feldman commented
What is the reason for the pushback? Technical explanation? A reference to some documentation? A blog post, perhaps? Please don't be lazy and provide the information rather than just saying "no".
I've been told that not all resources are able to be moved or have restrictions on being moved. If that is the case the "move the resources into a new resource group" recommendation is a non-starter.
Myron Johnson commented
So you can rename the top level subscription, but you can't rename a container?
Tried as suggested but below error
Resource move is not supported for resource types 'Microsoft.DevTestLab/schedules'. (Code: ResourceMoveNotSupported)
Stefan B. Christensen commented
App Service Environment's and probably other resources can't be moved they have to be re-deployed. So it still would be a very nice and needed feature
I can't believe that this is still an issue. This is just the label, not the ID and still we have to go through a full move?
Mahadevan LakshmiNarayanan commented
Not all resources are moveable to a new/another RG. We had to live with the RG name that is not intended for
This seems like such an easy implementation and one that is very much needed!
This was one of the first things that came up after we began our AZ buildout - I am surprised that this is not possible, seems pretty simple - and YES, NOT ALL RESOURCES CAN BE MOVED.
Refusal to change this is unacceptable.
Seriously? Not all resources can be moved between resource groups! The request is a necessity when managing large Azure subscriptions. The man hours users waste managing this limitation are far greater than those required to provide us with a solution. The delay has been agonizing, and the refusal inexcusable.
[Deleted User] commented
So basically you asked users to do your homework for you and then ignored their answers. So where do I delete my worthless account?
Moving this from a planned update to unplanned? Boooooo
And why the heck anyone should care about these votings if most voted thing gets sacked? You should put a note somewhere, saying - please create request for new feature and vote for it, but keep in mind that for any number of votes, 99% ***** will be given to implement it.
Oh come on ...
Daniel Smith commented
What a disappointing response to the highest voted issue for the Resource Manager team.
Can you please give us some details as to why this is so complicated to implement? Isn't the name just stored once against the resource group itself? Surely items are linked to resource groups by GUID rather than name?