Use CustomPatch for EdgeActions Service by kazrael2119 · Pull Request #39517 · Azure/azure-rest-api-specs

kazrael2119 · 2026-01-08T06:49:16Z

This is the change only impacting the client generation no REST API change.

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

Guidance doc: https://azure.github.io/typespec-azure/docs/howtos/arm/resource-operations/#resource-update-operations-patch

2025-09-01-preview and 2025-12-01-preview have not released SDKs before.

github-actions · 2026-01-08T06:49:36Z

Next Steps to Merge

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

Comment generated by summarize-checks workflow run.

github-actions · 2026-01-08T06:55:58Z

API Change Check

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

Language	API Review for Package
TypeSpec	Microsoft.Cdn
Go	sdk/resourcemanager/edgeactions/armedgeactions
Python	azure-mgmt-edgeactions
JavaScript	@azure/arm-edgeactions
Java	com.azure.resourcemanager:azure-resourcemanager-edgeactions
Swagger	Microsoft.Cdn-EdgeActions

tundwed · 2026-01-09T02:27:50Z

specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/main.tsp

  get is ArmResourceRead<EdgeAction>;
  create is ArmResourceCreateOrUpdateAsync<EdgeAction>;
-  update is ArmResourcePatchAsync<EdgeAction, EdgeActionProperties>;
+  update is ArmCustomPatchAsync<EdgeAction, EdgeActionUpdate>;


Looks like we are updating the input (request object) from EdgeActionProperties to EdgeActionUpdate

@kazrael2119 I think that would impact not just the client but also our api, we would have to update our model classes and the api.

Do we need to change the request object?

same for the other object

@tundwed This change to ArmCustomPatchAsync will not change the input model and you could compare the main update with this commit change.

Actually this change would not update any REST-level stuff. We just switched the template from ArmResourcePatchAsync to ArmCustomPatchAsync which is our recommandation in guide so that client side could better handle this operation.

The same for the other object.

Okay, got it.

kazrael2119 · 2026-01-09T08:02:31Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2026-01-09T08:02:37Z

You have several pipelines (over 10) configured to build pull requests in this repository. Specify which pipelines you would like to run by using /azp run [pipelines] command. You can specify multiple pipelines using a comma separated list.

kazrael2119 · 2026-01-09T08:23:57Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2026-01-09T08:24:04Z

You have several pipelines (over 10) configured to build pull requests in this repository. Specify which pipelines you would like to run by using /azp run [pipelines] command. You can specify multiple pipelines using a comma separated list.

weidongxu-microsoft

Mostly a question for service:

Do we need the SkuTypeUpdate?

For service to update the sku, can user e.g. only write name and leave tier undefined?

Ask because SkuTypeUpdate feels unusual...

MaryGao · 2026-01-13T08:39:50Z

Add some labels consdiering there is no real REST change and these labels are false alarmed.

specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/edgeactionsbasemodels.tsp

mentat9 · 2026-01-13T18:48:07Z

specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/edgeactionsbasemodels.tsp

+/** The type used for update operations of the EdgeAction. */
+model EdgeActionUpdate {
+  @doc("The resource-specific properties for this resource.")
+  properties?: EdgeActionPropertiesUpdate;


properties?: EdgeActionPropertiesUpdate;

I don't think the empty property bag is required. If you can remove this, you may also be able to remove two suppressions.

this is to avoid breaking change in generated swagger
origin swagger： https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/main/specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/preview/2025-12-01-preview/openapi.json#L1605-L1608

specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/edgeactionsbasemodels.tsp

mentat9 · 2026-01-13T18:48:16Z

specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/edgeactionsbasemodels.tsp

+}
+
+/** Represents an edge action properties */
+#suppress "@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/no-empty-model" "FIXME: Update justification, follow aka.ms/tsp/conversion-fix for details"


"FIXME: Update justification, follow aka.ms/tsp/conversion-fix for details"

Add the missing justification.

tundwed · 2026-01-14T01:46:29Z

Mostly a question for service:

Do we need the SkuTypeUpdate?

For service to update the sku, can user e.g. only write name and leave tier undefined?

Ask because SkuTypeUpdate feels unusual...

@weidongxu-microsoft We do not need this type, it was not present before. @kazrael2119 why was this type added?

weidongxu-microsoft · 2026-01-14T01:56:17Z

Mostly a question for service:
Do we need the SkuTypeUpdate?
For service to update the sku, can user e.g. only write name and leave tier undefined?
Ask because SkuTypeUpdate feels unusual...

@weidongxu-microsoft We do not need this type, it was not present before. @kazrael2119 why was this type added?

The type was in openapi.json before this PR

azure-rest-api-specs/specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/preview/2025-12-01-preview/openapi.json

Line 1890 in 08f8087

"SkuTypeUpdate": {

I think it was generated due to the ArmResourcePatchSync template. And ZiWei kept it in this PR to avoid breaking change on Swagger.

I think we can clean up it a bit in this PR, as long as service is good with it. As change to existing Swagger schema (e.g. remove the SkuTypeUpdate would trigger a breaking change review, though I think we can add a "benign" or "bugfix" label to suppress, as there is no service change)

tundwed · 2026-01-14T02:10:43Z

Mostly a question for service:
Do we need the SkuTypeUpdate?
For service to update the sku, can user e.g. only write name and leave tier undefined?
Ask because SkuTypeUpdate feels unusual...

@weidongxu-microsoft We do not need this type, it was not present before. @kazrael2119 why was this type added?

The type was in openapi.json before this PR

azure-rest-api-specs/specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/preview/2025-12-01-preview/openapi.json

Line 1890 in 08f8087

"SkuTypeUpdate": {

I think it was generated due to the ArmResourcePatchSync template. And ZiWei kept it in this PR to avoid breaking change on Swagger.

I think we can clean up it a bit in this PR, as long as service is good with it. As change to existing Swagger schema (e.g. remove the SkuTypeUpdate would trigger a breaking change review, though I think we can add a "benign" or "bugfix" label to suppress, as there is no service change)

We currently have no dependency on SkuTypeUpdate on the service side, so we can use name and tier and that should be fine. And so, if we can suppress it could we do that @kazrael2119 ?

kazrael2119 · 2026-01-14T02:47:18Z

Mostly a question for service:
Do we need the SkuTypeUpdate?
For service to update the sku, can user e.g. only write name and leave tier undefined?
Ask because SkuTypeUpdate feels unusual...

@weidongxu-microsoft We do not need this type, it was not present before. @kazrael2119 why was this type added?

The type was in openapi.json before this PR

azure-rest-api-specs/specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/preview/2025-12-01-preview/openapi.json

Line 1890 in 08f8087

"SkuTypeUpdate": {

I think it was generated due to the ArmResourcePatchSync template. And ZiWei kept it in this PR to avoid breaking change on Swagger.
I think we can clean up it a bit in this PR, as long as service is good with it. As change to existing Swagger schema (e.g. remove the SkuTypeUpdate would trigger a breaking change review, though I think we can add a "benign" or "bugfix" label to suppress, as there is no service change)

We currently have no dependency on SkuTypeUpdate on the service side, so we can use name and tier and that should be fine. And so, if we can suppress it could we do that @kazrael2119 ?

I can't use skuType directly for an Update model as it will fail the lint check with this error message

so I have to use skuTypeUpdate instead

tundwed · 2026-01-14T02:54:25Z

Mostly a question for service:
Do we need the SkuTypeUpdate?
For service to update the sku, can user e.g. only write name and leave tier undefined?
Ask because SkuTypeUpdate feels unusual...

@weidongxu-microsoft We do not need this type, it was not present before. @kazrael2119 why was this type added?

The type was in openapi.json before this PR

azure-rest-api-specs/specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/preview/2025-12-01-preview/openapi.json

Line 1890 in 08f8087

"SkuTypeUpdate": {

I think it was generated due to the ArmResourcePatchSync template. And ZiWei kept it in this PR to avoid breaking change on Swagger.
I think we can clean up it a bit in this PR, as long as service is good with it. As change to existing Swagger schema (e.g. remove the SkuTypeUpdate would trigger a breaking change review, though I think we can add a "benign" or "bugfix" label to suppress, as there is no service change)

We currently have no dependency on SkuTypeUpdate on the service side, so we can use name and tier and that should be fine. And so, if we can suppress it could we do that @kazrael2119 ?

I can't use skuType directly for an Update model as it will fail the lint check with this error message so I have to use skuTypeUpdate instead

I see, looks like ARM enforces this. Since it maintains the current state. I am okay with leaving it as is.

@weidongxu-microsoft let me know if you have a different thought

tundwed

The changes do not impact api logic.

weidongxu-microsoft · 2026-01-14T06:08:06Z

I see, looks like ARM enforces this. Since it maintains the current state. I am okay with leaving it as is.
@weidongxu-microsoft let me know if you have a different thought

Good to me, if we keep current state.

…tion Co-authored-by: tundwed <55289657+tundwed@users.noreply.github.com>

…59847 (#37048) Configurations: 'specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/tspconfig.yaml', API Version: 2025-12-01-preview, SDK Release Type: beta, and CommitSHA: '3fc43b6c80d8fce282a242b1f34fecced80ddcb5' in SpecRepo: 'https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs' Pipeline run: https://dev.azure.com/azure-sdk/internal/_build/results?buildId=5759847 Refer to https://eng.ms/docs/products/azure-developer-experience/develop/sdk-release/sdk-release-prerequisites to prepare for SDK release. **Release plan link:** [https://web.powerapps.com/apps/821ab569-ae60-420d-8264-d7b5d5ef734c?release-plan-id=9e03d787-20ec-f011-8544-000d3a5b5a24](https://web.powerapps.com/apps/821ab569-ae60-420d-8264-d7b5d5ef734c?release-plan-id=9e03d787-20ec-f011-8544-000d3a5b5a24) **Submitted by**: dannytundwe@microsoft.com ## Release Plan Details - Release Plan: https://aka.ms/sdk-release-planner?release-plan-id=9e03d787-20ec-f011-8544-000d3a5b5a24 Spec pull request: Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#39517 Spec API version: 2025-12-01-preview --------- Co-authored-by: tundwed <55289657+tundwed@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Danny Tundwe (from Dev Box) <dannytundwe@microsoft.com>

use CustomPatch for EdgeActions Service

93fbf6c

kazrael2119 requested review from AnamikaNupur and tundwed as code owners January 8, 2026 06:49

microsoft-github-policy-service bot added the Network - CDN label Jan 8, 2026

github-actions bot added ARMReview resource-manager TypeSpec Authored with TypeSpec WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Jan 8, 2026

update swagger

125fa86

github-actions bot added VersioningReviewRequired <valid label in PR review process>add this label when versioning review is required NotReadyForARMReview and removed WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Jan 8, 2026

fix lint error

e02d948

tundwed reviewed Jan 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

MaryGao changed the title ~~use CustomPatch for EdgeActions Service~~ Use CustomPatch for EdgeActions Service Jan 9, 2026

MaryGao added the tsp-updates-impact-sdk-only This TypeSpec change affects only SDK generation; therefore, ARM review can be safely skipped. label Jan 9, 2026

update

77333de

kazrael2119 added 2 commits January 9, 2026 16:04

Update edgeactionsbasemodels.tsp

c5a9a76

Merge branch 'main' into update-customPatch1

b1332d8

msyyc mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2026

[AutoPR azure-mgmt-edgeactions]-generated-from-SDK Generation - Python-5730146 Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#44582

Merged

weidongxu-microsoft mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2026

[AutoPR azure-resourcemanager-edgeactions]-generated-from-SDK Generation - Java-5730148 Azure/azure-sdk-for-java#47649

Merged

weidongxu-microsoft approved these changes Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

MaryGao added the BreakingChange-Approved-Benign Changes are not breaking at the REST API level and have at most minor impact to generated SDKs. label Jan 13, 2026

MaryGao added the BreakingChange-Approved-BugFix Changes are to correct the REST API definition to correctly describe service behavior label Jan 13, 2026

github-actions bot removed ARMAutoSignedOff labels Jan 13, 2026

MaryGao added the Versioning-Approved-Benign https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 label Jan 13, 2026

github-actions bot added WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required and removed NotReadyForARMReview labels Jan 13, 2026

mentat9 reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/edgeactionsbasemodels.tsp Show resolved Hide resolved

mentat9 reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions/edgeactionsbasemodels.tsp Show resolved Hide resolved

mentat9 reviewed Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

mentat9 added the ARMChangesRequested label Jan 13, 2026

github-actions bot added ARMAutoSignedOff ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review and removed WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required ARMChangesRequested labels Jan 13, 2026

tundwed self-requested a review January 14, 2026 03:23

tundwed approved these changes Jan 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

tundwed merged commit 6256065 into Azure:main Jan 15, 2026
94 of 95 checks passed

kazrael2119 deleted the update-customPatch1 branch January 15, 2026 01:54

This was referenced Jan 15, 2026

[TypeSpec] Generate SDK for TypeSpec project specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/EdgeActions #39507

Open

SDK Generation for EdgeActions TypeSpec - All 5 languages completed (updated from PR #39806) #39508

Draft

Copilot AI added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 15, 2026

Update to latest TypeSpec from PR #39517 - preparing for SDK regenera…

17b6781

…tion Co-authored-by: tundwed <55289657+tundwed@users.noreply.github.com>

azure-sdk mentioned this pull request Jan 16, 2026

[AutoPR @azure-arm-edgeactions]-generated-from-SDK Generation - JS-5759847 Azure/azure-sdk-for-js#37048

Merged

Conversation

kazrael2119 commented Jan 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Next Steps to Merge

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

API Change Check

Uh oh!

tundwed Jan 9, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MaryGao Jan 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tundwed Jan 9, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kazrael2119 commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

kazrael2119 commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

weidongxu-microsoft left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MaryGao commented Jan 13, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mentat9 Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kazrael2119 Jan 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mentat9 Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tundwed commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

weidongxu-microsoft commented Jan 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tundwed commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

kazrael2119 commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

tundwed commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

tundwed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

weidongxu-microsoft commented Jan 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

kazrael2119 commented Jan 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Jan 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Jan 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

MaryGao Jan 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

weidongxu-microsoft left a comment •

edited

Loading

kazrael2119 Jan 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

weidongxu-microsoft commented Jan 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

weidongxu-microsoft commented Jan 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading