Skip to content

[computeschedule] use ArmCustomPatchSync for patch method#35962

Merged
qiaozha merged 7 commits intoAzure:mainfrom
kazrael2119:update-tspconfig
Jul 23, 2025
Merged

[computeschedule] use ArmCustomPatchSync for patch method#35962
qiaozha merged 7 commits intoAzure:mainfrom
kazrael2119:update-tspconfig

Conversation

@kazrael2119
Copy link
Member

@kazrael2119 kazrael2119 commented Jul 17, 2025

Update the ArmResourcePatchSync to ArmCustomPatchSync and this is supposed to only impact the client generation and have no impact for REST API.

@openapi-pipeline-app
Copy link

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jul 17, 2025

Next Steps to Merge

✅ All automated merging requirements have been met! To get your PR merged, see aka.ms/azsdk/specreview/merge.

@openapi-pipeline-app
Copy link

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jul 17, 2025

PR validation pipeline restarted successfully. If there is ApiView generated, it will be updated in this comment.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jul 17, 2025

API Change Check

APIView identified API level changes in this PR and created the following API reviews

Language API Review for Package
Swagger Microsoft.ComputeSchedule
TypeSpec Microsoft.ComputeSchedule
Go sdk/resourcemanager/computeschedule/armcomputeschedule
C# Azure.ResourceManager.ComputeSchedule
Java com.azure.resourcemanager:azure-resourcemanager-computeschedule
Python azure-mgmt-computeschedule
JavaScript @azure/arm-computeschedule

@kazrael2119 kazrael2119 changed the title Update tspconfig [computeschedule] use ArmCustomPatchAsync for patch method Jul 17, 2025
@AzureRestAPISpecReview AzureRestAPISpecReview added ARMReview NotReadyForARMReview resource-manager RPaaS TypeSpec Authored with TypeSpec VersioningReviewRequired <valid label in PR review process>add this label when versioning review is required labels Jul 17, 2025
@kazrael2119 kazrael2119 changed the title [computeschedule] use ArmCustomPatchAsync for patch method [computeschedule] use ArmCustomPatchSync for patch method Jul 17, 2025
Copy link
Member

@weidongxu-microsoft weidongxu-microsoft left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

OK for Java, if this API is added in this new preview.

@NneOkeke NneOkeke self-requested a review July 17, 2025 17:06
@NneOkeke NneOkeke added the Versioning-Approved-BugFix https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 label Jul 18, 2025
@AzureRestAPISpecReview AzureRestAPISpecReview added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Jul 21, 2025
@qiaozha qiaozha added the ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review label Jul 23, 2025
@qiaozha qiaozha added the PublishToCustomers Acknowledgement the changes will be published to Azure customers. label Jul 23, 2025
@openapi-pipeline-app openapi-pipeline-app bot removed the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Jul 23, 2025
@qiaozha
Copy link
Member

qiaozha commented Jul 23, 2025

This PR is for client generation doesn't change the API contract, add the ARMSignedOff label to by pass the merge requirement.

@qiaozha qiaozha merged commit 3169865 into Azure:main Jul 23, 2025
70 of 71 checks passed
@kazrael2119 kazrael2119 deleted the update-tspconfig branch August 15, 2025 09:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ARMReview ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review PublishToCustomers Acknowledgement the changes will be published to Azure customers. resource-manager RPaaS TypeSpec Authored with TypeSpec Versioning-Approved-BugFix https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 VersioningReviewRequired <valid label in PR review process>add this label when versioning review is required

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants

Comments