-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
@azure/communication-identity Azure Core 2.0 Migration #20375
@azure/communication-identity Azure Core 2.0 Migration #20375
Conversation
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
@ramya-rao-a @LuChen-Microsoft Hi, do you have any idea what could be going on wrong in the browser pipeline? https://dev.azure.com/azure-sdk/public/_build/results?buildId=1368388&view=logs&j=22df7240-50e3-5f2e-b6e8-23dba21dcf6d&t=82938c17-2b16-5a29-ee40-8ae518dbe97d or could you suggest someone really knowledgeable about the Azure Core 2.0 migration who could help me out? |
@sarangan12 Can you please help here? |
@sarangan12 a related PR suffers from the same issue: #19043 |
…/feature/core-v2-identity
This pull request is protected by Check Enforcer. What is Check Enforcer?Check Enforcer helps ensure all pull requests are covered by at least one check-run (typically an Azure Pipeline). When all check-runs associated with this pull request pass then Check Enforcer itself will pass. Why am I getting this message?You are getting this message because Check Enforcer did not detect any check-runs being associated with this pull request within five minutes. This may indicate that your pull request is not covered by any pipelines and so Check Enforcer is correctly blocking the pull request being merged. What should I do now?If the check-enforcer check-run is not passing and all other check-runs associated with this PR are passing (excluding license-cla) then you could try telling Check Enforcer to evaluate your pull request again. You can do this by adding a comment to this pull request as follows: What if I am onboarding a new service?Often, new services do not have validation pipelines associated with them, in order to bootstrap pipelines for a new service, you can issue the following command as a pull request comment: |
@petrsvihlik I have started looking into this issue. Let me start debugging this and update this issue soon. |
@petrsvihlik I have looked into the code base. Here are some of the observations. (Please correct me if I am wrong).
Could you please resolve the dependency issues with communications-common package and migrate it before communications-identity? Please let me know. Thanks |
Thank you for your suggestions @sarangan12! Just so you know, we have another PR open for the migration of the communication-common library - #20337. And we used that PR as a starting point for this PR. This PR serves for verifying that the changes we make in the communication-common will work fine in the dependent libraries. Now to your observations:
Yes, we wanted to keep the backward compatibility and include both versions of the policy (V1 & V2) but it seems it's not needed in this case according to the architects
Yes, I'll update the other PR and remove the dependency on Thanks again! |
sdk/communication/communication-identity/test/public/utils/recordedClient.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
sdk/communication/communication-identity/test/public/utils/recordedClient.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@jeremymeng @joheredi hi, could some of you please take a quick look and confirm that the changes are ok? thank you! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good! Thanks for migrating to the new recorder as well!
/check-enforcer reset |
/azp run js - communication - ci |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
* Removed the dependency on @azure/core-http * Updated to Azure Communication Common v2 * Migrated to the new test recorder * Re-recorded tests * Excluded headers from comparison * Removed redundant sanitizers * Ensured consistent package name * Removed outdated comments * Added a changelog entry Co-authored-by: Jose Manuel Heredia Hidalgo <[email protected]>
* Removed the dependency on @azure/core-http * Updated to Azure Communication Common v2 * Migrated to the new test recorder * Re-recorded tests * Excluded headers from comparison * Removed redundant sanitizers * Ensured consistent package name * Removed outdated comments * Added a changelog entry Co-authored-by: Jose Manuel Heredia Hidalgo <[email protected]>
Packages impacted by this PR
Issues associated with this PR
Describe the problem that is addressed by this PR
@azure/core-rest-pipeline
and@azure/core-client
"@azure-tools/test-recorder": "^2.0.0"
What are the possible designs available to address the problem? If there are more than one possible design, why was the one in this PR chosen?
Are there test cases added in this PR?
Provide a list of related PRs (if any)
Command used to generate this PR:**(Applicable only to SDK release request PRs)
Checklists
Notes