Update 101-front-door-standard-premium to use azurerm 3.67.0

[johndowns]

No description provided.

[TomArcherMsft]

@johndowns Why are you restricting the provider version to 3.67.x instead of using "~>3.0", which uses 3.x ?

[johndowns]

Originally I think we followed along with the other samples, which seem to use this approach (or did at the time, anyway).

I'd be happy to change this to ~> 3.0 if that's the standard - however, given there's been a breaking change somewhere between 3.27 and 3.67 (and hence the changes to app-service.tf in this PR), I assumed it's best to specify a version to avoid breaking changes affecting the sample.

Please let me know what you'd like me to do and I'll adjust as required.

[lonegunmanb]

Thanks for opening this pr @johndowns, the e2e test passed and the code LGTM.

I understand your concern, "~> 3.67.0" stands for, we only tested this version with 3.67.0, which should be the latest version we have now. I'm ok with that, but I'll let @TomArcherMsft make the call.

[TomArcherMsft]

@johndowns

Thanks for the explanation. As you noted, we have changed the way we restrict the version.

The problem with pinning a sample to a specific version is that updating the version info could be forgotten over a long time, requiring a lot of changes to bring the code up to date. @lonegunmanb has implemented an e2e testing pipeline that runs weekly so that we can learn of breaking issues immediately and address as needed. Therefore, I would suggest that we use "~>3.0".

[johndowns]

Thanks @TomArcherMsft - updated and it looks like the tests pass. Please let me know if you need anything else to merge this.

[TomArcherMsft]

@johndowns
Thanks for the updates!

@lonegunmanb @grayzu @stemaMSFT
This PR LGTM if one of you wants to merge it.