[SRP] 2022-05-01 Swagger Api #19357
Merged
[SRP] 2022-05-01 Swagger Api #19357
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
MaximeKjaer
requested review from
msyyc,
BigCat20196,
ArcturusZhang and
JasonYang-MSFT
as code owners
|
Hi, @MaximeKjaer 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] |
1 similar comment
|
Hi, @MaximeKjaer 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] |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| compared swaggers (via Oad v0.9.6)] | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| blob.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2021-09-01(main) |
| blob.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2020-08-01-preview(main) |
| common.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2021-09-01(main) |
| common.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2020-08-01-preview(main) |
| file.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2021-09-01(main) |
| file.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2020-08-01-preview(main) |
| privatelinks.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2021-09-01(main) |
| privatelinks.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2020-08-01-preview(main) |
| queue.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2021-09-01(main) |
| queue.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2020-08-01-preview(main) |
| storage.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2021-09-01(main) |
| storage.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2020-08-01-preview(main) |
| table.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2021-09-01(main) |
| table.json | 2022-05-01(3cf9857) | 2020-08-01-preview(main) |
The following breaking changes are detected by comparison with the latest preview version:
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️⚠️LintDiff: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
| compared tags (via openapi-validator v1.13.0) | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| package-2022-05 | package-2022-05(3cf9857) | default(main) |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
Resource type naming must follow camel case. Path: '/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Storage/storageAccounts/{accountName}/blobServices/{BlobServicesName}' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L58 |
|
Resource type naming must follow camel case. Path: '/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Storage/storageAccounts/{accountName}/fileServices/{FileServicesName}' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/file.json#L61 |
|
Resource type naming must follow camel case. Path: '/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Storage/storageAccounts/{accountName}/ListAccountSas' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L650 |
|
Resource type naming must follow camel case. Path: '/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Storage/storageAccounts/{accountName}/ListServiceSas' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L695 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L45 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L102 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L139 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L204 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L261 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L313 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L354 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L391 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L442 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L490 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L550 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L603 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L656 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L708 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L768 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/blob.json#L824 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L36 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L69 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L111 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L189 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L227 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L285 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L349 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L464 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L500 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2022-05-01/storage.json#L552 |
️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️PoliCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passed for PoliCheck.
️❌SDK Track2 Validation: 2 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
- "https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/3cf9857aea480dc8186d148ee0e916664595d88b/specification/storage/resource-manager/readme.md#tag-package-2022-05">storage/resource-manager/readme.md#package-2022-05
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
"readme":"storage/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2022-05", "details":"Duplicate Schema named 'LeaseContainerRequest' (5 differences):\n - properties: "action":"x-ms-enum":"name":"LeaseContainerRequest", "modelAsString":true, "$ref":"#/components/schemas/LeaseContainerRequest", "description":"Specifies the lease action. Can be one of the available actions.", "leaseId":"$ref":"#/components/schemas/schemas:444", "description":"Identifies the lease. Can be specified in any valid GUID string format.", "breakPeriod":"$ref":"#/components/schemas/schemas:445", "description":"Optional. For a break action, proposed duration the lease should continue before it is broken, in seconds, between 0 and 60.", "leaseDuration":"$ref":"#/components/schemas/schemas:446", "description":"Required for acquire. Specifies the duration of the lease, in seconds, or negative one (-1) for a lease that never expires.", "proposedLeaseId":"$ref":"#/components/schemas/schemas:447", "description":"Optional for acquire, required for change. Proposed lease ID, in a GUID string format." =>\n - required: ["action"] =>\n - type: "object" => "string"\n - enum: => ["Acquire", "Renew", "Change", "Release", "Break"]\n - x-ms-enum: => "name":"LeaseContainerRequest", "modelAsString":true; This error can be temporarily avoided by using the 'modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication' setting. NOTE: This setting will be removed in a future version of @autorest/modelerfour; schemas should be updated to fix this issue sooner than that." |
|
"readme":"storage/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2022-05", "details":"Error: 1 errors occured -- cannot continue." |
️️✔️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).
️️✔️CadlValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for CadlValidation.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
|
Hi @MaximeKjaer, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
1 similar comment
|
Hi @MaximeKjaer, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
This was referenced Jun 7, 2022
Closed
Closed
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-BreakingChange-Go
CI-BreakingChange-JavaScript
labels
|
@ArcturusZhang @qiaozha could you help evaluate if we need involve breaking change review board to review , as there are SDK breaking change? |
|
I do see that the tooling is reporting breaking changes, but that is not the intention. The changes in this version are intended to be:
I'll look into what the build is highlighting as a breaking change |
|
I see the breaking changes are reported in previous versions, e.g. Did I perhaps misconfigure the build in a way that causes the CI to check for breaking changes in the full history of the module, instead of just in the most recent version? Or is this the expected behavior of the CI? This PR is only about making a few non-breaking changes compared to the previous version, so I was expecting it to clear the CI |
|
@msyyc @ArcturusZhang @qiaozha could you confirm the SDK breaking change ? |
|
@MaximeKjaer @jianyexi we are working on upgrading autorest.python version to fix the ci failure. It may take some time so please ignore the python failure for this PR. |
blueww
approved these changes
Aug 4, 2022
|
@ArcturusZhang I addressed your change request for the missing |
Generated ApiView
|
ArcturusZhang
approved these changes
Aug 9, 2022
This was referenced Aug 9, 2022
Closed
ghost
pushed a commit
to Azure/azure-resource-manager-schemas
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 9, 2022
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.
ARM API Information (Control Plane)
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
Azure 1st Party Service can try out the Shift Left experience to initiate API design review from ADO code repo. If you are interested, may request engineering support by filling in with the form https://aka.ms/ShiftLeftSupportForm.
Changelog
Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:
What's the purpose of the update?
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.
"directoryServiceOptions": "AADKERB"is already deployed (see public preview instructions)When do you expect to publish the swagger? Please provide date or, the the date is not yet available, the month.
ASAP.
By default, Azure SDKs of all languages (.NET/Python/Java/JavaScript for both management-plane SDK and data-plane SDK, Go for management-plane SDK only ) MUST be refreshed with/after swagger of new version is published. If you prefer NOT to refresh any specific SDK language upon swagger updates in the current PR, please leave details with justification here.
Contribution checklist (MS Employees Only):
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 the label "ARMReview" and "WaitForARMFeedback" will be added by bot to kick off ARM API Review. Missing to check this box in the following scenario may result in delays to the ARM manifest review and deployment.
-[ ] 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. You can use OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. For 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 you have any breaking changes as defined in the Breaking Change Policy, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board.
Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Additional details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking Change Wiki.
NOTE: To update API(s) in public preview for over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)
Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.