[TypeSpec] Update formatting of existing specs#24041
Conversation
|
Hi, @mikeharder 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
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| "How to fix":"Check the detailed log and verify if the TypeSpec emitter is able to create API review file for the changes in PR." | |
| "How to fix":"Check the detailed log and verify if the TypeSpec emitter is able to create API review file for the changes in PR." | |
| "How to fix":"Check the detailed log and verify if the TypeSpec emitter is able to create API review file for the changes in PR." |
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️PoliCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passed for PoliCheck.
️️✔️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.
️❌TypeSpec Validation: 8 Errors, 32 Warnings failed [Detail]
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
MissingExamplesDirectory |
"details":"The 'examples' directory is missing in the typespec folder specification/cognitiveservices/OpenAI.Inference, please ensure the 'examples' is added in the PR." |
SwaggerNotExistInPRBranch |
"details":"The generated swagger file 2022-12-01/openapi.json from typespec specification/cognitiveservices/OpenAI.Inference is not on the branch." |
SwaggerNotExistInPRBranch |
"details":"The generated swagger file 2023-03-15-preview/openapi.json from typespec specification/cognitiveservices/OpenAI.Inference is not on the branch." |
InConsistentSwagger |
"details":"The generated swagger file 2022-09-02-preview/fleets.json from typespec specification/containerservice/Fleet.Management is not the same as the '/mnt/vss/_work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/containerservice/resource-manager/Microsoft.ContainerService/aks/preview/2022-09-02-preview/fleets.json' in PR, please make sure the swagger is consistent with the generated swagger. You can find the difference in the pipeline log." |
InConsistentSwagger |
"details":"The generated swagger file 2023-03-15-preview/fleets.json from typespec specification/containerservice/Fleet.Management is not the same as the '/mnt/vss/_work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/containerservice/resource-manager/Microsoft.ContainerService/fleet/preview/2023-03-15-preview/fleets.json' in PR, please make sure the swagger is consistent with the generated swagger. You can find the difference in the pipeline log." |
MissingExamplesDirectory |
"details":"The 'examples' directory is missing in the typespec folder specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid, please ensure the 'examples' is added in the PR." |
InConsistentSwagger |
"details":"The generated swagger file EventGrid.json from typespec specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid is not the same as the '/mnt/vss/_work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/eventgrid/resource-manager/Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2017-06-15-preview/EventGrid.json' in PR, please make sure the swagger is consistent with the generated swagger. You can find the difference in the pipeline log." |
InConsistentSwagger |
"details":"The generated swagger file 2023-05-01-preview/TrafficController.json from typespec specification/servicenetworking/ServiceNetworking.Management is not the same as the '/mnt/vss/_work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/servicenetworking/resource-manager/Microsoft.ServiceNetworking/preview/2023-05-01-preview/TrafficController.json' in PR, please make sure the swagger is consistent with the generated swagger. You can find the difference in the pipeline log." |
| Unions cannot be emitted to OpenAPI v2 unless all options are literals of the same type. Location: cognitiveservices/OpenAI.Inference/models/completions.create.tsp#L198 |
|
| Unions cannot be emitted to OpenAPI v2 unless all options are literals of the same type. Location: cognitiveservices/OpenAI.Inference/models/chat.completions.tsp#L162 |
|
| Unions cannot be emitted to OpenAPI v2 unless all options are literals of the same type. Location: cognitiveservices/OpenAI.Inference/models/completions.create.tsp#L198 |
|
| Unions cannot be emitted to OpenAPI v2 unless all options are literals of the same type. Location: cognitiveservices/OpenAI.Inference/models/chat.completions.tsp#L162 |
|
The shared option is deprecated, use the @sharedRoute decorator instead.Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L174 |
|
The shared option is deprecated, use the @sharedRoute decorator instead.Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L199 |
|
Azure services must not have properties of type unknown.Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L65 |
|
| The names of Property types must use camelCase Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L68 |
|
| The names of Operation types must use camelCase Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L174 |
|
| Operations defined using RpcOperation should not have path parameters. Consider using ResourceAction or ResourceCollectionAction instead. Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L174 |
|
| Request body should not be of raw array type. Consider creating a container model that can add properties over time to avoid introducing breaking changes. Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L217 |
|
| The names of Operation types must use camelCase Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L199 |
|
| Operations defined using RpcOperation should not have path parameters. Consider using ResourceAction or ResourceCollectionAction instead. Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L199 |
|
| Request body should not be of raw array type. Consider creating a container model that can add properties over time to avoid introducing breaking changes. Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L217 |
|
| Request body should not be of raw array type. Consider creating a container model that can add properties over time to avoid introducing breaking changes. Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L217 |
|
| The names of Operation types must use camelCase Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L224 |
|
| Operations defined using RpcOperation should not have path parameters. Consider using ResourceAction or ResourceCollectionAction instead. Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L224 |
|
| The names of Operation types must use camelCase Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L249 |
|
| Operations defined using RpcOperation should not have path parameters. Consider using ResourceAction or ResourceCollectionAction instead. Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L249 |
|
| The names of Operation types must use camelCase Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L273 |
|
| Operations defined using RpcOperation should not have path parameters. Consider using ResourceAction or ResourceCollectionAction instead. Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L273 |
|
| The names of Operation types must use camelCase Location: specification/eventgrid/Azure.Messaging.EventGrid/main.tsp#L297 |
️️✔️PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Summary.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
Generated ApiView
|
|
/azp run specs - typespec - ci |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
dfccd50 to
66bfa04
Compare
timotheeguerin
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Formatting change looks good, can't spot any weird formatting
| @header | ||
| location: string; | ||
| @body result: AnomalyDetectionModel; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@timotheeguerin: Why is @header split onto two lines but @body stays on one line?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
one decorator can be inlined(it should keep your decision), more than one it will split lines
| @body | ||
| options: MultivariateBatchDetectionOptions |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@timotheeguerin: Why is @body split onto multiple lines here but not above?
| @doc("Azure Messaging EventGrid Client") | ||
| @versioned(ServiceApiVersions) | ||
| namespace Azure.Messaging.EventGrid { | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@timotheeguerin: What caused all these comments to move?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
did those get duplicated?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh I see there were all moved to the top, yeah thats a bug. Comments are always having weird formatting issue
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this is a bug do we need to revert the formatting check (and the changes to this file) until this is fixed?
No description provided.