Microsoft.AzureStackHCI new api version 2020-10-01 #10953
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…020-03-01-preview to version 2020-10-01
[Staging] Swagger Validation Report
️✔️ |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Azure CLI Extension Generation - Release
No readme.md specification configuration files were found that are associated with the files modified in this pull request, or swagger_to_sdk section in readme.md is not configured
|
azure-sdk-for-net - Release
No readme.md specification configuration files were found that are associated with the files modified in this pull request, or swagger_to_sdk section in readme.md is not configured
|
azure-sdk-for-go - Release
|
azure-sdk-for-python - Release
- Breaking Change detected in SDK
|
azure-sdk-for-python-track2 - Release
No readme.md specification configuration files were found that are associated with the files modified in this pull request, or swagger_to_sdk section in readme.md is not configured
|
azure-resource-manager-schemas - Release
|
Trenton Generation - Release
No readme.md specification configuration files were found that are associated with the files modified in this pull request, or swagger_to_sdk section in readme.md is not configured
|
azure-sdk-for-js - Release
|
This was referenced Sep 25, 2020
yungezz
reviewed
Sep 27, 2020
| "properties": { | ||
| "description": "Cluster properties.", | ||
| "$ref": "#/definitions/ClusterProperties", | ||
| "x-ms-client-flatten": true |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
just curious, why need flatten?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure. I just followed the validation tool suggestion. Is there any guidance for this option?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yup, it's an SDK generation recommendation. It prevents autorest from generating the properties property in the SDK models, which makes it easier to use a little bit.
In reply to: 496112091 [](ancestors = 496112091)
| "ConnectedRecently", | ||
| "NotConnectedRecently", | ||
| "Disconnected", | ||
| "Error" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate? Statuses follow the cluster lifecycle, we don't have "unknown".
| }, | ||
| "readOnly": true | ||
| }, | ||
| "cloudId": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if it's resource id, why not property name as "resourceId"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It was in the original design but ARM reviewer said that it would confuse users with the actual resource Id.
| "description": "Properties reported by cluster agent.", | ||
| "$ref": "#/definitions/ClusterReportedProperties" | ||
| }, | ||
| "trialDaysRemaining": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does this property has constraint? If yes, could you pls add it in Swagger?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could add "minimum: 0"? I don't want to define upper bound.
yungezz
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
majastrz
added
ARMSignedOff
majastrz
approved these changes
Sep 28, 2020
yungezz
approved these changes
Sep 29, 2020
|
hi @mbialecka is the change on prod already? |
|
@yungezz No, the new api version endpoints have not been setup in prod yet. |
|
@yungezz Can I have this merged? |
allenjzhang
requested changes
Oct 5, 2020
| "tags": [ | ||
| "Clusters" | ||
| ], | ||
| "operationId": "Clusters_List", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you update operation id to Clusters_ListBySubscription? Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't this a breaking change to a stable swagger?
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
allenjzhang
approved these changes
Oct 5, 2020
10 tasks
JeffreyRichter
added
the
Approved-BreakingChange
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
Contribution checklist:
If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.
ARM API Review Checklist
Ensure to check this box if one of the following scenarios meet updates in the PR, so that label “WaitForARMFeedback” will be added automatically to involve ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs, all “removals” and “adding a new property” no more require ARM API review.
If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged with urgency, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.
Breaking Change Review Checklist
If there are following updates in the PR, ensure to request an approval from API Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.
Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.