Add API version 2022-03-01 to Microsoft.PolicyInsights #18049
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
The only change is adding support for MG-level calls to the /checkPolicyRestrictions API.
|
Hi, @eladperets Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips. Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. [email protected] |
|
[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. |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| Since operation 'PolicyRestrictions_CheckAtManagementGroupScope' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L122 |
|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'checkpolicyrestrictions' in:'PolicyRestrictions_CheckAtManagementGroupScope'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L122 |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The schema 'CheckRestrictionsRequest' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L167 |
|
The schema 'CheckRestrictionsResourceDetails' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L204 |
|
The schema 'PendingField' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L224 |
|
The schema 'CheckRestrictionsResult' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L243 |
|
The schema 'contentEvaluationResult' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L254 |
|
The schema 'FieldRestrictions' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L269 |
|
The schema 'FieldRestriction' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L286 |
|
The schema 'PolicyEvaluationResult' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L337 |
|
The schema 'PolicyReference' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L357 |
|
Missing identifier id in array item property Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L174 |
|
Missing identifier id in array item property Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L246 |
|
Missing identifier id in array item property Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L257 |
|
Missing identifier id in array item property Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L277 |
| Since operation 'PolicyRestrictions_CheckAtSubscriptionScope' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L35 |
|
| Since operation 'PolicyRestrictions_CheckAtResourceGroupScope' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json#L77 |
️⚠️Avocado: 1 Warnings warning [Detail]
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| The default tag contains multiple API versions swaggers. readme: specification/policyinsights/resource-manager/readme.md tag: specification/policyinsights/resource-manager/readme.md#tag-package-2022-03 |
️️✔️~[Staging] ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️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.
- Compared Swaggers (Based on Oad v0.9.3)
- current:stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json compared with base:stable/2020-07-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json
- current:stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json compared with base:preview/2020-07-01-preview/checkPolicyRestrictions.json
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️️✔️SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
️️✔️PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
|
Hi, @eladperets your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board([email protected]). |
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
This was referenced Mar 1, 2022
|
Reviewing from the ARM side |
pilor
reviewed
Mar 7, 2022
| "type": "object", | ||
| "description": "The check policy restrictions parameters describing the resource that is being evaluated.", | ||
| "properties": { | ||
| "resourceDetails": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, I wanted to allow for future support for resource content and to keep the contract as similar as possible to the subscription-level API.
I don't think we'll be supporting resource content any time soon though, so also I'm fine with removing it if you prefer.
pilor
reviewed
Mar 7, 2022
...hts/resource-manager/Microsoft.PolicyInsights/stable/2022-03-01/checkPolicyRestrictions.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
pilor
reviewed
Mar 7, 2022
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| "/providers/{managementGroupsNamespace}/managementGroups/{managementGroupId}/providers/Microsoft.PolicyInsights/checkPolicyRestrictions": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah I basically copied it from some other file.
It's never too late to fix things however, lmk if you want me to make it constant (lol and then find how it breaks 10 different things down the line)
pilor
added
ARMSignedOff
pilor
approved these changes
Mar 7, 2022
|
approve for python breaking change. |
This was referenced Mar 15, 2022
Closed
FredericHeem
pushed a commit
to grucloud/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
May 16, 2022
* Copy 2020-07-01 files * Add new API version (2022-03-01) to Microsoft.PolicyInsights The only change is adding support for MG-level calls to the /checkPolicyRestrictions API. * Fix example title
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.
Add API version 2022-03-01 to Microsoft.PolicyInsights
The only change in the new API version is adding support for MG-level calls to the
/checkPolicyRestrictionsAPI. The first commit copies the swagger from the previous/checkPolicyRestrictionsversion (2020-07-01), the second commit adds the MG-level call and the details of the new version.Note: OpenAPI hub was failing to create a working branch, so had to do the update manually.
Changelog
Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:
Contribution checklist:
If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.
ARM API Review Checklist
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.
-[ ] To review changes efficiently, ensure you are using OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. More details, refer to the wiki.
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.
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.