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

[Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.IoTCentral to add version stable/2021-06-01 #16139

Conversation

gansvv
Copy link
Contributor

@gansvv gansvv commented Sep 23, 2021

This is a PR generated at OpenAPI Hub. You can view your work branch via this link.

Changelog

Add a changelog entry for 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 are you targeting to deploy the new service/feature to public regions? Please provide the date or, if the date is not yet available, the month. September 2021.
  3. When do you expect to publish the swagger? Please provide date or, the the date is not yet available, the month. October/November 2021.
  4. If updating an existing version, please select the specific langauge SDKs and CLIs that must be refreshed after the 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 refresh required 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

Applicability: ⚠️

If your changes encompass only the following scenarios, you should SKIP this section, as these scenarios do not require ARM review.

  • Change to data plane APIs
  • Adding new properties
  • All removals

Otherwise your PR may be subject to ARM review requirements. Complete the following:

  • Check this box if any of the following apply to the PR so that label “WaitForARMFeedback” will be added automatically to begin ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays to the manifest.

    • Adding a new service
    • Adding new API(s)
    • Adding a new API version
      -[ ] To review changes efficiently, ensure you copy the existing version into the new directory structure for first commit and then push new changes, including version updates, in separate commits.
  • 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 any of the following scenarios apply to the PR, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.

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

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, @gansvv 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 Sep 23, 2021

    Swagger Validation Report

    ️❌BreakingChange: 3 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
    Rule Message
    1041 - AddedPropertyInResponse The new version has a new property 'identity' in response that was not found in the old version.
    New: Microsoft.IoTCentral/stable/2021-06-01/iotcentral.json#L561:7
    Old: Microsoft.IoTCentral/stable/2021-06-01/iotcentral.json#L561:7
    1045 - AddedOptionalProperty The new version has a new optional property 'identity' that was not found in the old version.
    New: Microsoft.IoTCentral/stable/2021-06-01/iotcentral.json#L561:7
    Old: Microsoft.IoTCentral/stable/2021-06-01/iotcentral.json#L561:7
    1045 - AddedOptionalProperty The new version has a new optional property 'identity' that was not found in the old version.
    New: Microsoft.IoTCentral/stable/2021-06-01/iotcentral.json#L588:7
    Old: Microsoft.IoTCentral/stable/2021-06-01/iotcentral.json#L584:7
    ️⚠️LintDiff: 1 Warnings warning [Detail]
    The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
    Rule Message
    ⚠️ R3017 - GuidUsage Guid used in model definition 'SystemAssignedServiceIdentity' for property 'principalId'. Usage of Guid is not recommanded. If GUIDs are absolutely required in your service, please get sign off from the Azure API review board.
    Location: common-types/resource-management/v3/managedidentity.json#L92


    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

    Rule Message
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'Resource' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.IoTCentral/stable/2021-06-01/iotcentral.json#L611
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'CloudError' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.IoTCentral/stable/2021-06-01/iotcentral.json#L652
    ⚠️ R2066 - PostOperationIdContainsUrlVerb OperationId should contain the verb: 'apptemplates' in:'Apps_ListTemplates'. Consider updating the operationId
    Location: Microsoft.IoTCentral/stable/2021-06-01/iotcentral.json#L419
    ️️✔️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

    ️️✔️[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 Sep 23, 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-track2 - track2_azure-mgmt-iotcentral - 9.0.0b1
    ️✔️azure-sdk-for-go - iotcentral/mgmt/2018-09-01/iotcentral - v58.1.0
    ️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-net succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    • ️✔️Succeeded [Logs]Release - Generate from b0cf39b. SDK Automation 14.0.0
      warn	Skip initScript due to not configured
      command	sudo apt-get install -y dotnet-sdk-5.0
      command	autorest --version=V2 --csharp --reflect-api-versions --license-header=MICROSOFT_MIT_NO_VERSION [email protected]/[email protected] --csharp-sdks-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk ../azure-rest-api-specs/specification/iotcentral/resource-manager/readme.md
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
    • ️✔️Microsoft.Azure.Management.IotCentral [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-python-track2 warning [Detail]
    • ⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from b0cf39b. 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] 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
    • ️✔️track2_azure-mgmt-iotcentral [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      info	[Changelog] **Features**
      info	[Changelog]
      info	[Changelog]   - Model AppPatch has a new parameter state
      info	[Changelog]   - Model AppPatch has a new parameter identity
      info	[Changelog]   - Model App has a new parameter state
      info	[Changelog]   - Model App has a new parameter identity
    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-java warning [Detail]
    • ⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from b0cf39b. 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] 2021-10-09 03:10:03 INFO [VERSION][Found] current version "com.azure.resourcemanager:azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral;1.0.0-beta.1;1.0.0-beta.2"
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-10-09 03:10:03 INFO [VERSION][Not Found] cannot find stable version, current version "1.0.0-beta.2"
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-10-09 03:10:03 INFO autorest --version=3.6.0 --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/iotcentral/azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral --java.namespace=com.azure.resourcemanager.iotcentral   --java --pipeline.modelerfour.additional-checks=false --pipeline.modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication=true --azure-arm --verbose --sdk-integration --generate-samples --fluent=lite --java.fluent=lite --java.license-header=MICROSOFT_MIT_SMALL  ../azure-rest-api-specs/specification/iotcentral/resource-manager/readme.md
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-10-09 03:10:32 INFO [CI][Skip] ci.yml already has module azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-10-09 03:10:32 INFO [POM][Process] dealing with pom.xml
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-10-09 03:10:32 INFO [POM][Skip] pom already has module azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-10-09 03:10:32 INFO [POM][Success] Write to pom.xml
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-10-09 03:10:32 INFO [POM][Process] dealing with root pom
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-10-09 03:10:32 INFO [POM][Skip] pom already has module sdk/iotcentral
      cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-10-09 03:10:32 INFO [POM][Success] Write to root pom
    • ️✔️azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-10-09 03:12:10 DEBUG Got artifact_id: azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-10-09 03:12:10 DEBUG Got artifact: pom.xml
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-10-09 03:12:10 DEBUG Got artifact: azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral-1.0.0-beta.2-javadoc.jar
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-10-09 03:12:10 DEBUG Got artifact: azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral-1.0.0-beta.2.jar
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-10-09 03:12:10 DEBUG Match jar package: azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral-1.0.0-beta.2.jar
      cmderr	[Inst] 2021-10-09 03:12:10 DEBUG output: {"full": "```sh\ncurl -L \"https://portal.azure-devex-tools.com/api/sdk-dl-pub?p=Azure/16139/azure-sdk-for-java/azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral/azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral-1.0.0-beta.2.jar\" -o azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral-1.0.0-beta.2.jar\nmvn install:install-file -DgroupId=com.azure.resourcemanager -DartifactId=azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral -Dversion=1.0.0-beta.0 -Dfile=azure-resourcemanager-iotcentral-1.0.0-beta.2.jar -Dpackaging=jar -DgeneratePom=true
      ```"}
    ️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-go succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    • ️✔️Succeeded [Logs]Release - Generate from b0cf39b. SDK Automation 14.0.0
      command	sh ./initScript.sh ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/initInput.json ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/initOutput.json
      command	generator automation ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/generateInput.json ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/generateOutput.json
    • ️✔️iotcentral/mgmt/2018-09-01/iotcentral [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      info	[Changelog] No exported changes
    ️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-js succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    • ️✔️Succeeded [Logs]Release - Generate from b0cf39b. 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/iotcentral/resource-manager/readme.md
    • ️✔️@azure/arm-iotcentral [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      cmderr	[npmPack] loaded rollup.config.js with warnings
      cmderr	[npmPack] (!) Unused external imports
      cmderr	[npmPack] default imported from external module 'rollup' but never used
      cmderr	[npmPack] ./esm/iotCentralClient.js → ./dist/arm-iotcentral.js...
      cmderr	[npmPack] created ./dist/arm-iotcentral.js in 277ms
    ️⚠️ azure-resource-manager-schemas warning [Detail]
    • ⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from b0cf39b. Schema Automation 14.0.0
      command	.sdkauto/initScript.sh ../azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/initOutput.json
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] WARN old lockfile
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile The package-lock.json file was created with an old version of npm,
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile so supplemental metadata must be fetched from the registry.
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile This is a one-time fix-up, please be patient...
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile
      warn	File azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/initOutput.json not found to read
      command	.sdkauto/generateScript.sh ../azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/generateOutput.json
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: SyntaxError: Unexpected end of JSON input
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at JSON.parse (<anonymous>)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at Object.readJsonFile (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/utils.ts:174:17)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at getCurrentTemplateRefs (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:290:21)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at /home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:297:29
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (Use `node --trace-warnings ...` to show where the warning was created)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection. This error originated either by throwing inside of an async function without a catch block, or by rejecting a promise which was not handled with .catch(). To terminate the node process on unhandled promise rejection, use the CLI flag `--unhandled-rejections=strict` (see https://nodejs.org/api/cli.html#cli_unhandled_rejections_mode). (rejection id: 1)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) [DEP0018] DeprecationWarning: Unhandled promise rejections are deprecated. In the future, promise rejections that are not handled will terminate the Node.js process with a non-zero exit code.
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: SyntaxError: Unexpected end of JSON input
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at JSON.parse (<anonymous>)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at Object.readJsonFile (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/utils.ts:174:17)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at getCurrentTemplateRefs (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:290:21)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at /home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:297:29
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection. This error originated either by throwing inside of an async function without a catch block, or by rejecting a promise which was not handled with .catch(). To terminate the node process on unhandled promise rejection, use the CLI flag `--unhandled-rejections=strict` (see https://nodejs.org/api/cli.html#cli_unhandled_rejections_mode). (rejection id: 2)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: SyntaxError: Unexpected end of JSON input
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at JSON.parse (<anonymous>)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at Object.readJsonFile (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/utils.ts:174:17)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at getCurrentTemplateRefs (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:290:21)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at /home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:297:29
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection. This error originated either by throwing inside of an async function without a catch block, or by rejecting a promise which was not handled with .catch(). To terminate the node process on unhandled promise rejection, use the CLI flag `--unhandled-rejections=strict` (see https://nodejs.org/api/cli.html#cli_unhandled_rejections_mode). (rejection id: 3)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: SyntaxError: Unexpected end of JSON input
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at JSON.parse (<anonymous>)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at Object.readJsonFile (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/utils.ts:174:17)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at getCurrentTemplateRefs (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:290:21)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at /home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:297:29
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection. This error originated either by throwing inside of an async function without a catch block, or by rejecting a promise which was not handled with .catch(). To terminate the node process on unhandled promise rejection, use the CLI flag `--unhandled-rejections=strict` (see https://nodejs.org/api/cli.html#cli_unhandled_rejections_mode). (rejection id: 4)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: SyntaxError: Unexpected end of JSON input
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at JSON.parse (<anonymous>)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at Object.readJsonFile (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/utils.ts:174:17)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at getCurrentTemplateRefs (/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:290:21)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh]     at /home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/generator/generate.ts:297:29
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:2479) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection. This error originated either by throwing inside of an async function without a catch block, or by rejecting a promise which was not handled with .catch(). To terminate the node process on unhandled promise rejection, use the CLI flag `--unhandled-rejections=strict` (see https://nodejs.org/api/cli.html#cli_unhandled_rejections_mode). (rejection id: 5)
    • ️✔️iotcentral [View full logs]  [Release Schema Changes]
    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 @gansvv, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of Avocado, semantic validation, model validation, breaking change, lintDiff.

    TaskHow to fixPrioritySupport (Microsoft alias)
    AvocadoFix-AvocadoHighruowan
    Semantic validationFix-SemanticValidation-ErrorHighraychen, jianyxi
    Model validationFix-ModelValidation-ErrorHighraychen,jianyxi
    LintDiffFix-LintDiffhighjianyxi, ruoxuan
    If you need further help, please feedback via swagger feedback."

    @gansvv
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    gansvv commented Sep 24, 2021

    /azp run unifiedPipeline

    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    No pipelines are associated with this pull request.

    @gansvv gansvv marked this pull request as ready for review September 28, 2021 17:14
    @gansvv gansvv added DoNotMerge <valid label in PR review process> use to hold merge after approval WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Sep 28, 2021
    @gansvv
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    gansvv commented Sep 28, 2021

    We are adding "identity" to the request/response models in order to support Managed Identity (MI) in IoT Central APIs listed in the swagger spec. The api-version of 2021-06-01 is being updated in this PR. MI is part of the feature that was planned for release in this api-version. We had S360 compliance issues that required merging the PR first, then deploying MI changes to the services in prod, and then updating swagger. Thus, this breaking change is being done intentionally and will not affect customers (no customers are using this api-version in prod via SDK).

    "description": "The managed identity for IoT Central application.",
    "title": "Managed Identity",
    "type": "object",
    "properties": {
    Copy link
    Contributor

    @r-delgadillo r-delgadillo Sep 28, 2021

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    nit: Lets be a bit more descriptive on these properties. These will help users who are unfamiliar with these terms better identify how to use them

    E.g.
    principalId The AD principal ID. Also known as the objectId

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    sure, updated!

    Copy link
    Contributor

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    FYI, ManagementIdentify can also be refer to common definition:


    You don't have to define your own one

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Thanks, I've made a note. Will add this in next iteration when we support user-managed identities - we don't support that today and its present in ManagedServiceIdentityType.

    Copy link
    Contributor

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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


    This should be the one you need.

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Thanks, updated.

    @@ -65,6 +73,11 @@
    },
    "sku": {
    "name": "ST2"
    },
    "identity": {
    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    I think there will be three different scenarios for the response

    1. No "identity": {} since it was never set.
    2. Identity with type of SystemAssigned.
    3. Identity with type of None.

    We should show that in the example.

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Is there precedence or other example showing all different scenarios? I noticed enum for AppState (created/suspended) does not provide all scenarios in the examples (only created in shown in examples).

    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    The response for these 3 examples are vastly different. That is why I think it may be a good idea to include it in our examples. Just something nit. Up to you to decide.

    @mentat9
    Copy link
    Member

    mentat9 commented Sep 29, 2021

    We are adding "identity" to the request/response models in order to support Managed Identity (MI) in IoT Central APIs listed in the swagger spec. The api-version of 2021-06-01 is being updated in this PR. MI is part of the feature that was planned for release in this api-version. We had S360 compliance issues that required merging the PR first, then deploying MI changes to the services in prod, and then updating swagger. Thus, this breaking change is being done intentionally and will not affect customers (no customers are using this api-version in prod via SDK).

    Adding properties to an existing resource type without a version change is a REST breaking change, so even if no customers are using the API via SDK, they could be broken if they are using it via REST. If you want to add the property without a version change, you will need to go through breaking change review. I'll add the breaking change label. If you prefer to go with a new API version, that would need to come via a new PR, since the first commit needs to be the unchanged current API version files copied to the new API version folder.

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    Hi @gansvv, 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.

    @gansvv
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    gansvv commented Sep 30, 2021

    Added breaking change intake: https://msazure.visualstudio.com/One/_workitems/edit/11049939

    @poanchen
    Copy link
    Member

    poanchen commented Oct 1, 2021

    Added breaking change intake: https://msazure.visualstudio.com/One/_workitems/edit/11049939

    Remember to join the weekly azure breaking change meeting on every Monday with this PR link + the intake you did and explain to them why this isn't a breaking change. Thanks! Things are looking good!

    @JeffreyRichter JeffreyRichter added the Approved-BreakingChange DO NOT USE! OBSOLETE label. See https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 label Oct 4, 2021
    @gansvv
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    gansvv commented Oct 4, 2021

    Azure Breaking changes team has approved this change.

    I have validated that no external customers use the API changes using the logs:

     MicroserviceEvent
    | where env_time > ago(1d)
    | where env_cloud_role == "service-rp"
    | where operationName == "ResourceProviderService::CreateApplication"
    | where eventType == "common.incoming-service-request.v0"
    | extend json = parse_json(['metadata'])['requestHeaders']
    | extend requestAppId = tostring(parse_json(json['x-ms-client-app-id']))
    | extend requestTenantId = tostring(parse_json(json['x-ms-client-tenant-id']))
    | extend requestObjectId = tostring(parse_json(json['x-ms-client-object-id']))
    | extend requestPuid = tostring(parse_json(json['x-ms-client-puid']))
    | extend requestPrincipalId = tostring(parse_json(json['x-ms-client-principal-id']))
    | where resourceId contains "api-version=2021-06-01"
    | summarize count() by env_cloud_role, requestAppId
    

    image

    Almost all from iot central portal and one from Ibiza. All internal calls.

    @akning-ms akning-ms removed the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 6, 2021
    @gansvv
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    gansvv commented Oct 8, 2021

    /azp run unifiedPipeline

    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    No pipelines are associated with this pull request.

    @gansvv gansvv removed the DoNotMerge <valid label in PR review process> use to hold merge after approval label Oct 9, 2021
    @akning-ms akning-ms merged commit b0cf39b into Azure:main Oct 9, 2021
    ghost pushed a commit to Azure/azure-resource-manager-schemas that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2021
    gansvv added a commit to gansvv/azure-powershell that referenced this pull request Nov 18, 2021
    …Identities
    
    Updated IoT Central Management Plane .Net package to 4.0.0. This version supports Managed Identities, removes support for S1 SKU, and supports only regional locations (not geographic).
    
    Related:
    .NET SDK update PR: Azure/azure-sdk-for-net#24992
    Swagger update PR: Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#16139
    isra-fel pushed a commit to Azure/azure-powershell that referenced this pull request Nov 24, 2021
    …h support for Managed Identities (#16438)
    
    * Updated IoT Central DotNet package to 4.0.0 with support for Managed Identities
    
    Updated IoT Central Management Plane .Net package to 4.0.0. This version supports Managed Identities, removes support for S1 SKU, and supports only regional locations (not geographic).
    
    Related:
    .NET SDK update PR: Azure/azure-sdk-for-net#24992
    Swagger update PR: Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#16139
    
    * Minor updates to tests and changelog
    
    Minor updates to tests and changelog
    
    * Updated test session records.
    
    Updated test session records.
    
    * Update ChangeLog.md
    
    * Reverting module version
    
    Reverting module version and assembly version since they are computed per PR feedback.
    
    Co-authored-by: Yunchi Wang <[email protected]>
    jovannikolov-msft pushed a commit to jovannikolov-msft/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Dec 1, 2021
    …n stable/2021-06-01 (Azure#16139)
    
    * [IoT-Central] Added identity request and response objects for IoT Central APIs to support Managed Identities
    
    * Updated model as string
    
    * Updated case for none
    
    * Updated ArmIdentity to ManagedIdentity
    
    * Added description and title for ManagedIdentity
    
    * Updated casing for mI type
    
    * Reset casing for MI type
    
    * Updated comments for principalId and tenantId
    
    * Use common-types for supported system-assigned managed identities
    
    Co-authored-by: Ganesh Viswanathan <[email protected]>
    LeiWang3 pushed a commit to LeiWang3/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Mar 31, 2022
    …n stable/2021-06-01 (Azure#16139)
    
    * [IoT-Central] Added identity request and response objects for IoT Central APIs to support Managed Identities
    
    * Updated model as string
    
    * Updated case for none
    
    * Updated ArmIdentity to ManagedIdentity
    
    * Added description and title for ManagedIdentity
    
    * Updated casing for mI type
    
    * Reset casing for MI type
    
    * Updated comments for principalId and tenantId
    
    * Use common-types for supported system-assigned managed identities
    
    Co-authored-by: Ganesh Viswanathan <[email protected]>
    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
    Projects
    None yet
    Development

    Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

    6 participants