Add api-version 2022-06-01 to Microsoft.AzureStack RP#19572
Merged
honghr merged 7 commits intoJul 19, 2022
Conversation
|
Hi, @zcollins0 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. vscswagger@microsoft.com |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| compared swaggers (via Oad v0.9.6)] | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| AzureStack.json | 2022-06-01(22bfa8c) | 2017-06-01(main) |
| AzureStack.json | 2022-06-01(22bfa8c) | 2020-06-01(main) |
| CustomerSubscription.json | 2022-06-01(22bfa8c) | 2017-06-01(main) |
| CustomerSubscription.json | 2022-06-01(22bfa8c) | 2020-06-01(main) |
| Product.json | 2022-06-01(22bfa8c) | 2017-06-01(main) |
| Product.json | 2022-06-01(22bfa8c) | 2020-06-01(main) |
| Registration.json | 2022-06-01(22bfa8c) | 2017-06-01(main) |
| Registration.json | 2022-06-01(22bfa8c) | 2020-06-01(main) |
The following breaking changes are detected by comparison with the latest preview version:
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️⚠️LintDiff: 10 Warnings warning [Detail]
| compared tags (via openapi-validator v1.13.0) | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| package-2022-06 | package-2022-06(22bfa8c) | default(main) |
The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| Per the Noun_Verb convention for Operation Ids, the noun 'Products' should not appear after the underscore. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L164 |
|
| Since operation 'DeploymentLicenseCreate' 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.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L145 |
|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'generatedeploymentlicense' in:'DeploymentLicense_Create'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L145 |
|
| The response of operation:'CustomerSubscriptions_Get' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/CustomerSubscription.json#L64 |
|
| The response of operation:'CustomerSubscriptions_Create' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/CustomerSubscription.json#L150 |
|
| The response of operation:'Products_Get' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L64 |
|
| The response of operation:'Registrations_Get' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Registration.json#L100 |
|
| The response of operation:'Registrations_CreateOrUpdate' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Registration.json#L180 |
|
| The response of operation:'Registrations_Update' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Registration.json#L229 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Returns a list of products. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L155 |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The response schema of operations API '/providers/Microsoft.AzureStack/operations' does not match the ARM specification. Please standardize the schema. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L18 |
|
The response in the GET collection operation 'CloudManifestFileList' does not match the response definition in the individual GET operation 'CloudManifestFileGet' . Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L54 |
|
The schema 'Operation' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L265 |
|
The schema 'Display' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L282 |
|
The schema 'OperationList' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L303 |
|
The schema 'ErrorDetails' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L412 |
|
The schema 'ErrorDetails' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L412 |
|
The schema 'ErrorDetails' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L412 |
|
The schema 'ErrorDetails' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L412 |
|
The schema 'DeviceConfiguration' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L734 |
|
The schema 'MarketplaceProductLogUpdate' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L757 |
|
The schema 'ProductLog' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L782 |
| Per the Noun_Verb convention for Operation Ids, the noun 'Products' should not appear after the underscore. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L212 |
|
| Per the Noun_Verb convention for Operation Ids, the noun 'Products' should not appear after the underscore. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L260 |
|
| Since operation 'ProductsGetProducts' 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.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L212 |
|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L326 |
|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'uploadproductlog' in:'Products_UploadLog'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L308 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: isSystemExtension Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L428 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: supportMultipleExtensions Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L439 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: vmScaleSetEnabled Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L454 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: isCompatible Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L626 |
|
| The tracked resource, 'Registration', must have a list by resource group operation.(This rule does not apply for tenant level resources.) Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Registration.json#L353 |
|
| The response of operation:'CloudManifestFile_List' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L55 |
|
| The response of operation:'CloudManifestFile_Get' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/AzureStack.json#L88 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Returns a list of products. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L20 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Returns the specified product. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L65 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Returns a list of products. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L203 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Returns the specified product. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L251 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Returns the specified product. Location: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2022-06-01/Product.json#L299 |
️❌Avocado: 1 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The default tag does not contain all APIs in this RP. Please make sure the missing API swaggers are in the default tag. readme: specification/azurestack/resource-manager/readme.md json: Microsoft.AzureStack/stable/2016-01-01/Registration.json |
️️✔️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: 1 Warnings warning [Detail]
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
- "https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/22bfa8c289cf037a2dbe38090b0f42cbc8e42274/specification/azurestack/resource-manager/readme.md#tag-package-2022-06">azurestack/resource-manager/readme.md#package-2022-06
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| "readme":"azurestack/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2022-06", "details":"Security scheme azure_auth is unknown and will not be processed. Only supported types are AADToken, AzureKey, Anonymous" |
️️✔️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
|
openapi-workflow-bot
Bot
added
ARMReview
WaitForARMFeedback
|
Hi, @zcollins0 your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board(armapireview@microsoft.com). |
|
Hi @zcollins0, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
|
Hi @zcollins0, 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. |
Contributor
Author
|
Handful of questions for ARM reviewers:
|
This was referenced Jun 23, 2022
rkmanda
reviewed
Jun 24, 2022
| "$ref": "examples/DeploymentLicense/Post.json" | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| "tags": [ |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Whats the reason why this is a POST and not a PUT? We recommend using PUTs for creating resources that way you also get the benefit of using template deployments.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not a tracked resource, it's a subscription-wide proxy resource/action
rkmanda
reviewed
Jun 24, 2022
| "description": "Client API Version.", | ||
| "required": true, | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "default": "2022-06-01" |
Member
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The remaining breaking change errors are from a preview version, not from the previous GA version. We're not planning to move those preview changes to GA (yet). Is that acceptable?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also, I could use help on the Avocado one. I have no idea what's wrong - looks to me like all tags are included.
|
Please ensure to respond feedbacks from the ARM API reviewer. When you are ready to continue the ARM API review, please remove |
openapi-workflow-bot
Bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
openapi-workflow-bot
Bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
NetRock
approved these changes
Jul 5, 2022
NetRock
added
the
ARMSignedOff
openapi-workflow-bot
Bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
Contributor
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Contributor
Author
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
This was referenced Jul 19, 2022
ghost
pushed a commit
to Azure/azure-resource-manager-schemas
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 19, 2022
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
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.
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 appy 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 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.