Skip to content

EventHub: updated for GEO DR - #1709

Merged
Garrett Serack (fearthecowboy) merged 9 commits into
Azure:currentfrom
v-Ajnava:currentEHDR
Sep 26, 2017
Merged

EventHub: updated for GEO DR #1709
Garrett Serack (fearthecowboy) merged 9 commits into
Azure:currentfrom
v-Ajnava:currentEHDR

Conversation

@v-Ajnava

@v-Ajnava Ajit Navasare (v-Ajnava) commented Sep 20, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This checklist is used to make sure that common issues in a pull request are addressed. This will expedite the process of getting your pull request merged and avoid extra work on your part to fix issues discovered during the review process.

PR information

  • The title of the PR is clear and informative.
  • There are a small number of commits, each of which have an informative message. This means that previously merged commits do not appear in the history of the PR. For information on cleaning up the commits in your pull request, see this page.
  • Except for special cases involving multiple contributors, the PR is started from a fork of the main repository, not a branch.
  • If applicable, the PR references the bug/issue that it fixes.
  • Swagger files are correctly named (e.g. the api-version in the path should match the api-version in the spec).

Quality of Swagger

@fearthecowboy

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

APIs added -- requiring ARM signoff (Gaurav Bhatnagar (@ravbhatnagar))

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As soon as ARM signs off, I'm good too.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ajit Navasare (@v-Ajnava) - same feedback as on the other PR.

}
}
},
"/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.EventHub/namespaces/{namespaceName}/disasterRecoveryConfig": {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

pluralize resource type name. disasterRecoveryConfigs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Resolved

}
],
"responses": {
"201": {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

202 response for async delete.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Resolved

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Reverted as delete is not async

}
}
},
"/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.EventHub/namespaces/{namespaceName}/disasterRecoveryConfig/{alias}/breakpairing": {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

camelcase, breakPairing

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Resolved

"properties": {
"x-ms-client-flatten": true,
"properties": {
"provisioningState": {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

enum. What about a Failed provisioning State value? You mention that possible values as accepted or succeeded. In case the operation fails, failed should be returned. And do you support cancel? In that case, you will have a canceled provisioning state as well.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Resolved, we don't support cancel.

@azuresdkciprbot

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Hi There,

I am the AutoRest Linter Azure bot. I am here to help. My task is to analyze the situation from the AutoRest linter perspective. Please review the below analysis result:

File: specification/eventhub/resource-manager/readme.md
Before the PR: Warning(s): 5 Error(s): 0
After the PR: Warning(s): 7 Error(s): 0

💡 Please review potentially introduced Error(s)/Warning(s): Analysis Report 💡

AutoRest Linter Guidelines | AutoRest Linter Issues | Send feedback

Thanks for your co-operation.

@salameer

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Ajit Navasare (@v-Ajnava) any update s here?

Have all Gaurav's feedbacks been addressed here?

@v-Ajnava

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Samer Alameer (@salameer), Yes, Gaurav's feedback are addressed.

@azuresdkciprbot

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Hi There,

I am the AutoRest Linter Azure bot. I am here to help. My task is to analyze the situation from the AutoRest linter perspective. Please review the below analysis result:

File: specification/eventhub/resource-manager/readme.md
Before the PR: Warning(s): 5 Error(s): 0
After the PR: Warning(s): 7 Error(s): 0

💡 Please review potentially introduced Error(s)/Warning(s): Analysis Report 💡

AutoRest Linter Guidelines | AutoRest Linter Issues | Send feedback

Thanks for your co-operation.

@AutorestCI

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@AutorestCI

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No modification for AutorestCI/azure-sdk-for-node

@AutorestCI

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants