[Hub Generated] Publish private branch 'davidcho23-resources-Microsoft.Resources-2023-11-01' #26600
Conversation
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
…7-01 to version 2023-11-01
Contributor
Author
|
The PR is created based on the updates in the private branch. The updates in the PR has already been reviewed and approved with this PR Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/15233 |
Next Steps to Merge✔️ All automated merging requirements have been met! Refer to step 4 in the PR workflow diagram (even if your PR is for data plane, not ARM). |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| compared tags (via openapi-validator v2.1.6) | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| package-bicep-2023-11 | package-bicep-2023-11(f323c9a) | default(main) |
[must fix]The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
| Rule | Message | Related RPC [For API reviewers] |
|---|---|---|
|
Operations API must be implemented for 'Microsoft.Resources'. Location: Microsoft.Resources/stable/2023-11-01/bicepClient.json#L1 |
|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'decompilebicep' in:'Decompile_Bicep'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.Resources/stable/2023-11-01/bicepClient.json#L42 |
️❌Avocado: 1 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The readme file has more than one default tag. readme: specification/resources/resource-manager/readme.md |
️️✔️SwaggerAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️TypeSpecAPIView 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.
️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
️️✔️PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Summary.
️️✔️Automated merging requirements met succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
Generated ApiView
|
AzureRestAPISpecReview
added
ARMChangesRequested
ARMReview
BreakingChangeReviewRequired
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
…-rest-api-specs-pr/davidcho23-resources-Microsoft.Resources-2023-11-01
AzureRestAPISpecReview
added
ARMChangesRequested
and removed
ARMSignedOff
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
visingla-ms
reviewed
Dec 6, 2023
| "type": "object", | ||
| "properties": { | ||
| "path": { | ||
| "type": "string" |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What path is it? Is it some storage blob path? and Why is it needed?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The decompilation can generate multiple Bicep files. For example, a decompilation of a nested deployment could generate the main.bicep file and the nested_moduleDeploy.bicep file. If we wanted to retrieve the contents of nested_moduleDeploy.bicep file, the path is needed to access the correct FileDefinition object in the array
visingla-ms
reviewed
Dec 6, 2023
| }, | ||
| "entryPoint": { | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "The entry point for the Bicep file." |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does entry point indicate in the generated bicep file? Just curious.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The entry point is the key to retrieve the main Bicep file generated from the decompilation.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we could clarify this a bit with the following:
Suggested change
| "description": "The entry point for the Bicep file." | |
| "description": "The file path to the main Bicep file generated from the decompiled ARM json template." |
visingla-ms
reviewed
Dec 6, 2023
| { | ||
| "swagger": "2.0", | ||
| "info": { | ||
| "title": "BicepRp", |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is it called bicepRP? is there a RP named Bicep?
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"..Client" seems to fit better with the convention used in other files. If we're being strict with terminology, this isn't a new RP, it's just a set of APIs added to an existing RP (Microsoft.Resources).
Suggested change
| "title": "BicepRp", | |
| "title": "BicepClient", |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed the name to BicepClient
Contributor
|
Please get breaking changes approval from SDK reviewer for Go SDK. |
visingla-ms
added
the
ARMSignedOff
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
Contributor
|
Approved from ARM side based on private repo PR. |
raych1
added
the
Approved-SdkBreakingChange-Go
Contributor
Author
|
/pr RequestMerge |
visingla-ms
approved these changes
Dec 8, 2023
visingla-ms
deleted the
published/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/davidcho23-resources-Microsoft.Resources-2023-11-01
branch
arifibrahim4
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 26, 2024
…t.Resources-2023-11-01' (#26600) * Adds base for updating Microsoft.Resources from version stable/2023-07-01 to version 2023-11-01 * Updates readme * Updates API version in new specs and examples * Add decompileBicep * Updated api version in bicepRp.json * Removed unnecessary files. * Updated readme and used prettier * Added to custom-words.txt and updated bicepRp.json * Changed parameter references and updated descriptions for definitions * Adding array of tuples for files * Changed a word * Updating decompileBicep.json example * Changes to add FileDefinition * Adding x-ms-identifiers for name * Changing name to path and using prettier . * Updating tag * Update readme * Fixed example decompileBicep.json file * Fixed a tag * Updating error response * Renamed bicepRp to bicepClient * Updated description for entryPoint * Updated reference to BicepClient * Update path value * Update reference to bicepClient.json
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.
This is a PR generated at OpenAPI Hub. You can view your work branch via this link.
ARM (Control Plane) API Specification Update Pull Request
PR review workflow diagram
Please understand this diagram before proceeding. It explains how to get your PR approved & merged.
[1] ARM review queue (for merge queues, see [4])
The PRs are processed by time opened, ascending. Your PR may show up on 2nd or later page.
If you addressed Step 1 from the diagram and your PR is not showing up in the queue, ensure the label
ARMChangesRequestedis removed from your PR. This should cause the label
WaitForARMFeedbackto be added.[2] https://aka.ms/azsdk/support/specreview-channel
[3] List of SDK breaking changes approvers in pinned Teams announcement
[4] public repo merge queue, private repo merge queue (for ARM review queue, [1])
If you need further help with anything, see
Getting helpsection below.Purpose of this PR
What's the purpose of this PR? Check all that apply. This is mandatory!
Due diligence checklist
To merge this PR, you must go through the following checklist and confirm you understood
and followed the instructions by checking all the boxes:
ARM resource provider contract and
REST guidelines (estimated time: 4 hours).
I understand this is required before I can proceed to Step 2, "ARM Review", for this PR.
Breaking changes review (Step 1)
you must follow the breaking changes process.
IMPORTANT This applies even if:
Such claims must be reviewed, and the process is the same.
ARM API changes review (Step 2)
ARMReviewlabel.Viewing API changes
For convenient view of the API changes made by this PR, refer to the URLs provided in the table
in the
Generated ApiViewcomment added to this PR. You can use ApiView to show API versions diff.Suppressing failures
If one or multiple validation error/warning suppression(s) is detected in your PR, please follow the
Swagger-Suppression-Process
to get approval.
Getting help
and https://aka.ms/ci-fix.