Adding swagger for new api-version consumption 2018-08-31

[ncalagar]

This checklist is used to make sure that common issues in a pull request are addressed. This will expedite the process of getting your pull request merged and avoid extra work on your part to fix issues discovered during the review process.

PR information

• The title of the PR is clear and informative.
• There are a small number of commits, each of which have an informative message. This means that previously merged commits do not appear in the history of the PR. For information on cleaning up the commits in your pull request, see this page.
• Except for special cases involving multiple contributors, the PR is started from a fork of the main repository, not a branch.
• If applicable, the PR references the bug/issue that it fixes.
• Swagger files are correctly named (e.g. the api-version in the path should match the api-version in the spec).

Quality of Swagger

• I have read the contribution guidelines.
• My spec meets the review criteria:
  • The spec conforms to the Swagger 2.0 specification.
  • The spec follows the guidelines described in the Swagger checklist document.
  • Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.

[AutorestCI]

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#2158

[AutorestCI]

Automation for azure-sdk-for-java

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-java

[AutorestCI]

Automation for azure-sdk-for-ruby

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-ruby

[AutorestCI]

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-go

[ms-premp]

@ms-premp fyi

[AutorestCI]

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-node

[ms-premp]

@ravbhatnagar Please have a look as we will need ARM sign off too.
Here is the summary of changes

• Adding new property "isRecurringCharge" to MarketplaceProperties.

• Adding two new properties “usageStart” and “usageEnd” to ManagementGroupAggregatedCostProperties
  and
  adding usageStart and usageEnd filter to ManangmentGroupAggregatedCost and examples

• Removing CostTags API and its examples.

• Adding new charges apis and their associated changes and examples

[azuresdkci]

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

[hovsepm]

@ncalagar new operation groups are confusing:

"operationId": "ChargesByEnrollmentAccount_List",
"operationId": "ChargesForEnrollmentAccount_ListByBillingPeriod",
"operationId": "ChargesByDepartment_List",
"operationId": "ChargesForDepartment_ListByBillingPeriod",

please revise. I would recommend having it as

"operationId": "EnrollmentAccountCharges_List",
"operationId": "EnrollmentAccountCharges_ListByBillingPeriod",
"operationId": "DepartmentCharges_List",
"operationId": "DepartmentCharges_ListByBillingPeriod",

better solution would be to group everything under Charges e.g.

"operationId": "Charges_ListByEnrollmentAccount",
"operationId": "Charges_ListByEnrollmentAccountForBillingPeriod",
"operationId": "Charges_ListByDepartment",
"operationId": "Charges_ListByDepartmentForBillingPeriod",

you actually have a Marketplace operations here - https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/rest/api/consumption/marketplaces and according to that naming it should rather be

"operationId": "Charges_ListByEnrollmentAccount",
"operationId": "Charges_ListForBillingPeriodByEnrollmentAccount",
"operationId": "Charges_ListByDepartment",
"operationId": "Charges_ListForBillingPeriodByDepartment",

[hovsepm]

Please address review comments

[hovsepm]

@ravbhatnagar please take a look. This is a new API version.

[ncalagar]

@hovsepm Sure, addressed the comment.

[hovsepm]

@ncalagar I've signed off. Waiting for @ravbhatnagar to review the new API version.

[ravbhatnagar]

Just one comment. Please fix. Conditional sign off.

[ravbhatnagar]

Why are different model names being used in the response? Each one, in the end, refers to the same properties envelope. Same model should be used in the response since the GET is on charges in each case.

[ncalagar]

@ravbhatnagar Addressed the feedback and updated all apis to use same model ChargesListResult

[ms-premp]

Thanks @ravbhatnagar .. we have incorporated the feedback.
@hovsepm please have a look.. and if good then please merge.
On a side note.. I see a bunch of commits and new reviewers added.. possibly because of the merge with latest.
This PR only has following relevant changes

• Copy of older version
• Added new changes with new version
• Incorporated review feedback from Gaurav.

Thanks

[hovsepm]

@ncalagar @ms-premp this means that your merge was done wrong. Please rebase your fork/branch with the upstream master branch. You should not have any other teams commits in your PR.

[hovsepm]

At the current state PR is unmergeable. Please rebase with upstream

[ncalagar]

@hovsepm rebased with upstream and created two commits (first one copy of older version and second one new version including all feedback ) please let me know if any other change is needed and sorry for the merge issue