Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Billing through Azure functionality. #14466

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 4, 2021
Merged

Billing through Azure functionality. #14466

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 4, 2021

Conversation

rapatank
Copy link
Contributor

@rapatank rapatank commented May 19, 2021

MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.

Changelog

Please ensure to add changelog with this PR by answering the following questions.

  1. What's the purpose of the update?
    • new service onboarding
    • new API version
    • update existing version for new feature
    • update existing version to fix swagger quality issue in s360
    • Other, please clarify
  2. When you are targeting to deploy new service/feature to public regions? Please provide date, or month to public if date is not available yet.
  3. When you expect to publish swagger? Please provide date, or month to public if date is not available yet.
  4. If it's an update to existing version, please select SDKs of specific language and CLIs that require refresh after swagger is published.
    • SDK of .NET (need service team to ensure code readiness)
    • SDK of Python
    • SDK of Java
    • SDK of Js
    • SDK of Go
    • PowerShell
    • CLI
    • Terraform
    • No, no need to refresh for updates in this PR

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.

    • Adding new API(s)
    • Adding a new API version
    • Ensure to copy the existing version into new directory structure for first commit (including refactoring) and then push new changes including version updates in separate commits. This is required to review the changes efficiently.
    • Adding a new service
  • Please ensure you've reviewed following guidelines including ARM resource provider contract and REST guidelines. Estimated time (4 hours). This is required before you can request review from ARM API Review board.

  • 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 Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.

  • Removing API(s) in stable version
  • Removing properties in stable version
  • Removing API version(s) in stable version
  • Updating API in stable or public preview version with Breaking Change Validation errors
  • Updating API(s) in public preview over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)

Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.

Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.

@openapi-workflow-bot
Copy link

Hi, @rapatank Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips.

  • Please ensure to do self-check against checklists in first PR comment.
  • PR assignee is the person auto-assigned and responsible for your current PR reviewing and merging.
  • For specs comparison cross API versions, Use API Specs Comparison Report Generator
  • If there is CI failure(s), to fix CI error(s) is mandatory for PR merging; or you need to provide justification in PR comment for explanation. How to fix?

  • Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. [email protected]

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    [Call for Action] To better understand Azure service dev/test scenario, and support Azure service developer better on Swagger and REST API related tests in early phase, please help to fill in with this survey https://aka.ms/SurveyForEarlyPhase. It will take 5 to 10 minutes. If you already complete survey, please neglect this comment. Thanks.

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented May 19, 2021

    Swagger Validation Report

    ️❌BreakingChange: 9 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
    Rule Message
    1026 - TypeChanged The new version has a different type 'object' than the previous one ''.
    New: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L535:9
    Old: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L535:9
    1026 - TypeChanged The new version has a different type 'object' than the previous one ''.
    New: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L285:13
    Old: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L285:13
    1026 - TypeChanged The new version has a different type 'object' than the previous one ''.
    New: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L330:13
    Old: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L330:13
    1026 - TypeChanged The new version has a different type 'object' than the previous one ''.
    New: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L541:5
    Old: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L541:5
    1026 - TypeChanged The new version has a different type 'object' than the previous one ''.
    New: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L595:5
    Old: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L590:5
    1038 - AddedPath The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version.
    New: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/account.json#L30:5
    1038 - AddedPath The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version.
    New: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/account.json#L259:5
    1038 - AddedPath The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version.
    New: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/account.json#L307:5
    1041 - AddedPropertyInResponse The new version has a new property 'nextLink' in response that was not found in the old version.
    New: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L597:7
    Old: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/enterprisePolicy.json#L591:7
    ️⚠️LintDiff: 2 Warnings warning [Detail]
    The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
    Rule Message
    ⚠️ R3010 - TrackedResourceListByImmediateParent The child tracked resource, 'privateEndpointConnections' with immediate parent 'EnterprisePolicy', must have a list by immediate parent operation.
    Location: azure-rest-api-specs/blob/51d5b98237b074ab8bba9f566840eedbce15f36a/)#L1#L1)
    ⚠️ R3010 - TrackedResourceListByImmediateParent The child tracked resource, 'privateLinkResources' with immediate parent 'EnterprisePolicy', must have a list by immediate parent operation.
    Location: azure-rest-api-specs/blob/51d5b98237b074ab8bba9f566840eedbce15f36a/)#L1#L1)


    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

    Rule Message
    R4009 - RequiredReadOnlySystemData The response of operation:'PrivateLinkResources_Get' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response.
    Location: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/privateLinkResources.json#L82
    ⚠️ R3018 - EnumInsteadOfBoolean Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: isDataAction
    Location: common-types/resource-management/v2/types.json#L348
    ⚠️ R4030 - UniqueXmsExample Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Gets private endpoint connection.
    Location: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/privateEndpointConnection.json#L119
    ⚠️ R4030 - UniqueXmsExample Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Gets private endpoint connection.
    Location: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/privateLinkResources.json#L68
    ⚠️ R4030 - UniqueXmsExample Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Gets private endpoint connection.
    Location: Microsoft.PowerPlatform/preview/2020-10-30-preview/privateLinkResources.json#L119
    ️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for Avocado.
    ️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for ModelValidation.
    ️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
    ️️✔️Cross-Version Breaking Changes succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There are no breaking changes.
    ️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There is no credential detected.
    ️️✔️[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation

    The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:

    |:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"powerplatform/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-2020-10-30-preview",
    "details":"> Installing AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0)"|
    |:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"powerplatform/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-2020-10-30-preview",
    "details":"> Installed AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0->1.8.0)"|


    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

    |:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"powerplatform/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-2020-10-30-preview",
    "details":"> Loading AutoRest extension '@autorest/modelerfour' (4.15.456->4.15.456)"|

    ️️✔️[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
    ️️✔️[Staging] SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for SpellCheck.
    ️️✔️[Staging] Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented May 19, 2021

    Swagger Generation Artifacts

    ️️✔️[Staging] ApiDocPreview succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
     Please click here to preview with your @microsoft account. 
    ️️✔️[Staging] SDK Breaking Change Tracking succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Breaking Changes Tracking

    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-python warning [Detail]
    • ⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from 36afc0b. SDK Automation 14.0.0
      command	sh scripts/automation_init.sh ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/initOutput.json
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] ERROR: pip's dependency resolver does not currently take into account all the packages that are installed. This behaviour is the source of the following dependency conflicts.
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] azure-mgmt-core 1.2.2 requires azure-core<2.0.0,>=1.9.0, but you have azure-core 1.6.0 which is incompatible.
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] ERROR: pip's dependency resolver does not currently take into account all the packages that are installed. This behaviour is the source of the following dependency conflicts.
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] azure-mgmt-core 1.2.2 requires azure-core<2.0.0,>=1.9.0, but you have azure-core 1.6.0 which is incompatible.
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] WARNING: Skipping azure-nspkg as it is not installed.
      command	sh scripts/automation_generate.sh ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/generateOutput.json
      warn	No package detected after generation
    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-java warning [Detail]
    • ⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from 36afc0b. SDK Automation 14.0.0
      command	./eng/mgmt/automation/init.sh ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/initOutput.json
      command	./eng/mgmt/automation/generate.py ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/generateOutput.json
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-06-04 09:32:09 INFO [VERSION][Not Found] cannot find version for "com.azure.resourcemanager:azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform"
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-06-04 09:32:09 INFO [VERSION][Not Found] cannot find stable version, current version "1.0.0-beta.1"
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-06-04 09:32:09 INFO autorest --version=3.1.3 --use=@autorest/[email protected] --java.azure-libraries-for-java-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-java --java.output-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-java/sdk/powerplatform/azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform --java.namespace=com.azure.resourcemanager.powerplatform   --java --pipeline.modelerfour.additional-checks=false --pipeline.modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication=true --azure-arm --verbose --sdk-integration --fluent=lite --java.fluent=lite --java.license-header=MICROSOFT_MIT_SMALL ../azure-rest-api-specs/specification/powerplatform/resource-manager/readme.md
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-06-04 09:32:45 INFO [CI][Success] Write to ci.yml
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-06-04 09:32:45 INFO [POM][Process] dealing with pom.xml
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-06-04 09:32:45 INFO [POM][Skip] pom already has module azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-06-04 09:32:45 INFO [POM][Success] Write to pom.xml
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-06-04 09:32:45 INFO [POM][Process] dealing with root pom
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-06-04 09:32:45 INFO [POM][Success] Write to root pom
    • ️✔️azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-06-04 09:36:10 DEBUG Got artifact_id: azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-06-04 09:36:10 DEBUG Got artifact: pom.xml
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-06-04 09:36:10 DEBUG Got artifact: azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform-1.0.0-beta.1-sources.jar
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-06-04 09:36:10 DEBUG Got artifact: azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform-1.0.0-beta.1-javadoc.jar
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-06-04 09:36:10 DEBUG Got artifact: azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform-1.0.0-beta.1.jar
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-06-04 09:36:10 DEBUG Match jar package: azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform-1.0.0-beta.1.jar
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-06-04 09:36:10 DEBUG output: {"full": "```sh\ncurl -L \"https://portal.azure-devex-tools.com/api/sdk-dl-pub?p=Azure/14466/azure-sdk-for-java/azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform/azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform-1.0.0-beta.1.jar\" -o azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform-1.0.0-beta.1.jar\nmvn install:install-file -DgroupId=com.azure.resourcemanager -DartifactId=azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform -Dversion=1.0.0-beta.0 -Dfile=azure-resourcemanager-powerplatform-1.0.0-beta.1.jar -Dpackaging=jar -DgeneratePom=true
      ```"}
    ️❌ azure-sdk-for-go failed [Detail]
    • Failed [Logs]Release - Generate from 36afc0b. SDK Automation 14.0.0
      command	sh ./initScript.sh ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/initInput.json ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/initOutput.json
      error	Script return with result [failed] code [1] signal [null] cwd [azure-sdk-for-go/src/github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-go]: sh ./initScript.sh
      warn	File azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/initOutput.json not found to read
      command	go run ./tools/generator/main.go automation ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/generateInput.json ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/generateOutput.json
      error	Script return with result [failed] code [1] signal [null] cwd [azure-sdk-for-go/src/github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-go]: go run ./tools/generator/main.go automation
      warn	Skip package processing as generation is failed
    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-js warning [Detail]
    • ⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from 36afc0b. SDK Automation 14.0.0
      warn	Skip initScript due to not configured
      command	autorest --version=V2 --typescript --license-header=MICROSOFT_MIT_NO_VERSION [email protected]/[email protected] --typescript-sdks-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-js/azure-sdk-for-js ../../azure-rest-api-specs/specification/powerplatform/resource-manager/readme.md
      warn	No file changes detected after generation
      warn	No package detected after generation
    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    NewApiVersionRequired reason:

    A service’s API is a contract with customers and is represented by using the api-version query parameter. Changes such as adding an optional property to a request/response or introducing a new operation is a change to the service’s contract and therefore requires a new api-version value. This is critically important for documentation, client libraries, and customer support.

    EXAMPLE: if a customer calls a service in the public cloud using api-version=2020-07-27, the new property or operation may exist but if they call the service in a government cloud, air-gapped cloud, or Azure Stack Hub cloud using the same api-version, the property or operation may not exist. Because there is no clear relationship between the service api-version and the new property/operation, customers can’t trust the documentation and Azure customer have difficulty helping customers diagnose issues. In addition, each client library version documents the service version it supports. When an optional property or new operation is added to a service and its Swagger, new client libraries must be produced to expose this functionality to customers. Without updating the api-version, it is unclear to customers which version of a client library supports these new features.

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    Hi @rapatank, one or multiple breaking change(s) is detected in your PR. Please check out the breaking change(s), and provide business justification in the PR comment and @ PR assignee why you must have these change(s), and how external customer impact can be mitigated. Please ensure to follow breaking change policy to request breaking change review and approval before proceeding swagger PR review.
    Action: To initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.
    If you want to know the production traffic statistic, please see ARM Traffic statistic.
    If you think it is false positive breaking change, please provide the reasons in the PR comment, report to Swagger Tooling Team via https://aka.ms/swaggerfeedback.

    @raych1 raych1 added the Approved-BreakingChange DO NOT USE! OBSOLETE label. See https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 label May 19, 2021
    @openapi-workflow-bot openapi-workflow-bot bot added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label May 19, 2021
    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    Hi, @rapatank your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board([email protected]). cc @raych1

    @raych1
    Copy link
    Member

    raych1 commented May 19, 2021

    Breaking change review is out of scope coz service isn't GAed yet.

    @raych1
    Copy link
    Member

    raych1 commented May 20, 2021

    @rapatank , can you go thru the contribution checklist in first comment of this PR and check on the appropriate items so that ARM can proceed the review?

    @rapatank
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    rapatank commented May 20, 2021

    @rapatank , can you go thru the contribution checklist in first comment of this PR and check on the appropriate items so that ARM can proceed the review?

    Done, updated the contribution checklist.

    @filizt
    Copy link
    Contributor

    filizt commented May 20, 2021

    @rapatank , can you go thru the contribution checklist in first comment of this PR and check on the appropriate items so that ARM can proceed the review?

    Done, updated the contribution checklist.

    Could you update the changelog too please?

    @rapatank
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    @rapatank , can you go thru the contribution checklist in first comment of this PR and check on the appropriate items so that ARM can proceed the review?

    Done, updated the contribution checklist.

    Could you update the changelog too please?

    Done, changelog has been updated.

    @rapatank , can you go thru the contribution checklist in first comment of this PR and check on the appropriate items so that ARM can proceed the review?

    Done, updated the contribution checklist.

    Could you update the changelog too please?

    Done.

    @raych1
    Copy link
    Member

    raych1 commented May 21, 2021

    @ArcturusZhang , can you check the potential breaking change for GO SDK?

    @ArcturusZhang
    Copy link
    Member

    The breaking changes in go SDK are accumulated from the previous PRs.

    @majastrz majastrz added ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review and removed WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Jun 2, 2021
    Copy link
    Member

    @majastrz majastrz left a comment

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

    The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

    Signed off from ARM side.

    @akning-ms akning-ms merged commit 36afc0b into master Jun 4, 2021
    mkarmark pushed a commit to mkarmark/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Jul 21, 2021
    * Billing through Azure functionality.
    
    * Billing through Azure functionality.
    @JackTn JackTn deleted the azurebilling branch June 16, 2022 00:48
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Labels
    Approved-BreakingChange DO NOT USE! OBSOLETE label. See https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review CI-BreakingChange-Go
    Projects
    None yet
    Development

    Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

    6 participants