Make the JavaComponent definitions polymorphism and expose fqdn for sba and eureka #28102
Conversation
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 specs (v0.10.5) | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| JavaComponents.json | 2024-02-02-preview(9b51b7b) | 2023-11-02-preview(main) |
The following breaking changes are detected by comparison with the latest preview version:
️⚠️LintDiff: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
| Compared specs (v2.2.0) | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| package-preview-2024-02 | package-preview-2024-02(9b51b7b) | package-preview-2024-02(release-app-Microsoft.App-2024-02-02-preview) |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| A nested resource type's List operation must include all the parent segments in its api path. Location: Microsoft.App/preview/2024-02-02-preview/JavaComponents.json#L36 |
|
| The summary and description values should not be same. Location: Microsoft.App/preview/2024-02-02-preview/JavaComponents.json#L297 |
|
| Use the latest version v5 of types.json. Location: Microsoft.App/preview/2024-02-02-preview/JavaComponents.json#L397 |
️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️SwaggerAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️TypeSpecAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Summary.
️️✔️Automated merging requirements met succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
Generated ApiView
|
Caoxuyang
changed the title
AzureRestAPISpecReview
added
ARMReview
resource-manager
WaitForARMFeedback
|
I have problem resolving the lint check of this pr.
The discriminator has to be a required property while the failed check is "No required property in Patch Body". Can I somehow bypass/suppress this check for this pr? |
|
Please address or respond to feedback from the ARM API reviewer. |
specification/app/resource-manager/Microsoft.App/preview/2024-02-02-preview/JavaComponents.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
For PATCH this should not be bypassed since you must allow single property PATCH. If you need this as mandatory in a PUT, you need to separate out the objects so that the PATCH has a different definition from the PUT. Check this repo many teams have a separate definition for PATCH objects with _Update definition. |
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
Hey @raosuhas, we need this discriminator value to decide what 'kind' of resource this request body is trying to patch. For example here are two JavaComponent resource definitions with ComponentType as the discriminator: In this And another Java Component: SpringCloudConfig, and it has its own unique property configUniqueProperty So when there is a Patch request that comes in, we need the ComponentType to know what properties should be allowed in this patch request body, right? For example, if the componentType = SpringBootAdmin, the allowed properties to be patched should include fqdn & httpEndpoint, but It's just like polymorphism. In the PUT request, I can use the componentType to distinguish which sub-class of the |
|
The suppression reason makes sense to me. |
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
|
@Caoxuyang Sorry I am not following. If the resource is getting PATCHED then you already know what resource it is in your storage. You can still fail it based on the saved resource type right ? for eg : The customer should be able to only specify fqdn in the body , but you can fail it if the saved is not of type SpringBootAdmin. @TimLovellSmith please let me know if you disagree on this. |
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
| "description": "Container App Ingress configuration.", | ||
| "type": "object", | ||
| "properties": { | ||
| "fqdn": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it better to be dashboardFqdn since it will enforce AAD auth and block the APP/SDK calls?
Hey @raosuhas, you are right. Of course we can verify the request body based on our resource provider's DB information. In your proposal, what we should do is that we put every single property from different JavaComponents into one big PatchObjectDefinition, even though they are not compatible with each other. In the customer's point of view, they have so much choice to be put into Patch body but they will be really possible to get a 400 Bad Request from the server for adding invalid properties to a not compatible ComponentType. What's more, this can also bring much confusion to toolset developers like terraform. I hope this makes sense to you. I don't think an all-in-one Patch model can provide good customer experience in this case. cc @bowen5 @TimLovellSmith |
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
OK yeah makes sense. Approving this |
raosuhas
added
the
ARMSignedOff
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
…ba and eureka (Azure#28102) * Make the JavaComponent definitions polymorphism * fix api version * revert error response change * refine examples * fix default value * fix * fix * try to remove required * try remove require in patch body * fix * try fix lint * fix * add suppression for discriminator * fix --------- Co-authored-by: Xuyang Cao <[email protected]>
* Adds base for updating Microsoft.App from version preview/2023-11-02-preview to version 2024-02-02-preview * Updates readme * Updates API version in new specs and examples * Functions Extension endpoint for Web RP (#27873) * Functions extension api-spec commit * merge with latest * Functions Extension in 2024-02-02-preview * correcetd version in readme * avacado fail fix - version * pattern addition * fix for PathForResourceAction * lint diff and model validation checks * AutoRest exception fix * endpoint response as string and not schema * response schema with string * example schema * example within spec * extension example with data * extensions example with body * body as string * [Microsoft.App] add runtime attribute to app configuration (#27892) * add configuration.runtime for apps * Add Nacos For Java Component. (#28045) * Add Nacos For Java Component. * fix spell check. * [Container Apps] Update Runtime to add DotNet support (#28001) * [Container Apps] Update Runtime to add DotNet support * Remove default value * Rename dotNet to dotnet * [Container Apps] Remove AspireResourceServerApi type for DotNetComponent (#28005) * [Container Apps] Remove AspireResourceServerApi type for DotNetComponent * Only keep changes to 2024-02-02-preview * [ContainerApp] Support peer traffic encryption. (#28129) * Make the JavaComponent definitions polymorphism and expose fqdn for sba and eureka (#28102) * Make the JavaComponent definitions polymorphism * fix api version * revert error response change * refine examples * fix default value * fix * fix * try to remove required * try remove require in patch body * fix * try fix lint * fix * add suppression for discriminator * fix --------- Co-authored-by: Xuyang Cao <[email protected]> * ContainerAppsBuild and ContainerAppsPatch API (#27982) * Added CloudBuild and CloudPatch * Fixed pipeline errors * Added ContainerApp example * Fixed typo in example * Fixed linting error * Fixed spacing * Addressed comments * Addressed comments and modified sample * Fixed linting error * Addressed comments * Linting * Fixed typo * Fixed Typo * Resolving model validation error * [Microsoft.App] add java agent related properties (#28192) * add java agent related properties * fix build error * fix format * re-run pipeline * update enum list and fix typo * revert cspell config * update level field type from enum to string * add identifiers for array prop * Fix error response for aca (#28425) * fix * fix * Adding identity for scale rules (#28283) * Adding identity for scale rules * fix scale example * Fix schema issue for Microsoft.App in 2024-02-02-preview (#28454) * fix * fix * fix * fix * fix * fix * Update Container Apps Swagger Schema to include kind property (#28405) * Added support for KIND property to container apps schema * added reference to example request schema * prettier check * changes to example conforming to swagger * used enum for app kind * minor fixes * merged main * Revert "merged main" This reverts commit 2437d60. * fixed checks * Add detailed job execution to api (#27977) * Add detailed job execution to api * Add fields * address comment * add x-ms-identifiers * prettier * address comments * Address comments * Address comments * update example * Fix property name * Fix example * [Microsoft.App] optimize java agent related properties (#28573) * optimize java agent related props * fix * adding logging property to include logger settings --------- Co-authored-by: Bowen Wan <[email protected]> * Add accountName for queueScaler (#28672) * add accountName for queueScaler * updated example * updated * updated * updated * Adding identity settings (#28117) * Adding identity settings * fix casing in examples * Switch to array since ARM doesn't allow dictionaries. * identity property should be required. * prettier * Updating description * Adding Jobs spec * Update specification/app/resource-manager/Microsoft.App/preview/2024-02-02-preview/Jobs.json Co-authored-by: Jitin John <[email protected]> * Move IdentitySettings to CommonDefinitions --------- Co-authored-by: Jitin John <[email protected]> * Add SessionPools and Sessions (#28047) * Add SessionPools.json and Sessions.json * Add private endpoint connections for managed environment (#28775) * add pe * fix * fix * fix * fix * fix * fix * use v5 * fix * fix * Add support for SMB storage in connectedEnvironment (#29158) * Add support for SMB storage in connectedEnvironment * move smb properties to common * fix reference --------- Co-authored-by: [email protected] <[email protected]> * API spec for LogicApps extension on Microsoft.App (#29083) * API spec for LogicApps extension on Microsoft.App * format * fix typos * fix issues * fix example references * fix more issues * fix issues * fix more model validation * fix * fix model * fix format * fix lintdiff * fix example * fix headers * add delete * add missing file --------- Co-authored-by: Anand G Menon <[email protected]> * Add publicNetworkAccess in managed environment (#29092) * fix * fix * fix example * fix lint * revert previous change for patch * fix go sdk duplicate schema * fix go sdk duplicate schema * fix billing meter * fix billing meter --------- Co-authored-by: Jitin John <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: SushmithaVReddy <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: sonwan2020 <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Xiangyang Yu <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: daniv-msft <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Xuyang Cao <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Xuyang Cao <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Harry Li <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Jimmy Fang <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Vaclav Turecek <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Shubham Sachdeva <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: lihaMSFT <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Bowen Wan <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: njucz <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: yitaopan <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: anandgmenon <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: [email protected] <[email protected]>
ARM (Control Plane) API Specification Update Pull Request
Tip
Overwhelmed by all this guidance? See the
Getting helpsection at the bottom of this PR description.Note
As of January 2024 there is no PR assignee. This is expected. See https://aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review.
PR review workflow diagram
Please understand this diagram before proceeding. It explains how to get your PR approved & merged.
Click here to see the details of Step 1
Breaking changes review (Diagram Step 1)
If the automation determines you have breaking changes, i.e. Step 1 from the diagram applies to you,
you must follow the breaking changes process.
IMPORTANT This applies even if:
Such claims must be reviewed, and the process is the same.
Click here to see the details of Step 2
ARM API changes review (Diagram Step 2)
Click here to see the diagram footnotes
Diagram footnotes
[1] See ARM review queue (for PR merge queues, see [2]).
[2] public repo merge queue, private repo merge queue (for ARM review queue, [1])
The ARM reviewer on-call engineer visits the merge queue twice a day, so the approximate ETA for merges is 12 - 24 hours.
Purpose of this PR
What's the purpose of this PR? Check the specific option that applies. 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 the diagram Step 2, "ARM API changes review", for this PR.
Additional information
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
suppressions guide to get approval.
Getting help
Purpose of this PRandDue diligence checklist.Next Steps to Mergecomment. It will appear within few minutes of submitting this PR and will continue to be up-to-date with current PR state.and https://aka.ms/ci-fix.
queuedstate, please add a comment with contents/azp run.This should result in a new comment denoting a
PR validation pipelinehas started and the checks should be updated after few minutes.