[Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01 by anpint · Pull Request #5210 · Azure/azure-rest-api-specs

anpint · 2019-02-15T19:24:38Z

If you are a MSFT employee you can view your work branch via this link.

Contribution checklist:

I have reviewed the documentation for the workflow.
Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.

…-10-01 to version 2019-02-01

AutorestCI · 2019-02-15T19:25:08Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-ruby

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-ruby

AutorestCI · 2019-02-15T19:25:21Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-js

A PR has been created for you:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-js#1813

AutorestCI · 2019-02-15T19:25:22Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

A PR has been created for you:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#4371

AutorestCI · 2019-02-15T19:26:46Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-java

A PR has been created for you:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-java#3232

AutorestCI · 2019-02-15T19:27:30Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

A PR has been created for you:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-node#4691

AutorestCI · 2019-02-15T19:29:07Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

A PR has been created for you:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#4402

azuresdkci · 2019-02-15T19:33:06Z

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

veronicagg · 2019-02-15T21:23:54Z

@anpint thanks for using OpenAPI Hub to create this PR, are you expecting to make more changes on the specs? or is it an api-version update with the same content?

veronicagg

see question above.

anpint · 2019-02-15T21:30:30Z

@anpint thanks for using OpenAPI Hub to create this PR, are you expecting to make more changes on the specs? or is it an api-version update with the same content?

We will be making additional changes to the specs. I was advised by my teammate to first create an API version update with the same content, and follow-up with another PR containing changes to the protocol.

veronicagg · 2019-02-19T18:24:26Z

@anpint in this case, would you want to work against a branch for your team in the repo? We can create one for you and we could review PRs against it, if you'd like. You can put all your work there, until you're ready to send it to master.
This PR is currently against master branch and we should not merge partial work to master.
If you're going to be the only person working on the changes, you can also keep adding commits to this PR and add [Do not merge] or [Work in Progress] to the title of the PR.
If you have more questions, feel free to let me know.
Thanks!

anpint · 2019-02-19T18:58:14Z

@anpint in this case, would you want to work against a branch for your team in the repo? We can create one for you and we could review PRs against it, if you'd like. You can put all your work there, until you're ready to send it to master.

OpenApi Hub created this branch for us: dev-storagesync-Microsoft.StorageSync-2019-02-01. Are you suggesting that we could create PRs against that branch instead of master for incremental work?

This PR is currently against master branch and we should not merge partial work to master.
If you're going to be the only person working on the changes, you can also keep adding commits to this PR and add [Do not merge] or [Work in Progress] to the title of the PR.

This is my first time going through this process, and my team member who did this before (ankushbindlish2) suggested that we follow this procedure:

Create a PR with the new API version as a copy of the previous API version. (This is the current PR)
Create a second PR with the actual protocol changes.

The intention of this approach is to make it easier to review the actual protocol changes, because in this current PR, all files for the 2019-02-01 API version are being treated as new files, even though it's just a copy of the previous API version, so it will be harder to see the incremental change between the new API version, and the previous API version.

veronicagg · 2019-02-20T18:21:35Z

@anpint I believe we clarified this offline. If you create a branch with the updates to the api-version, that's great, then send PRs to that branch for review, so once your work is completed you can have 1 PR against master approved and merged. If you have more questions, feel free to let me know.

…pport for parallel upload and download sync status tracking (#5233) * Modify sync status properties to support parallel upload and download activity * Fix a typo in storagesync.json * Fix a linter issue with ErrorCode property in FilesNotSyncingError * Fix a validation error with SyncActivityState enum usage * Fix "integer" types in ServerEndpointSyncStatus to specify format * rename cloud endpoint property storageAccountShareName to azureFileShareName

veronicagg · 2019-02-26T19:29:47Z

@anpint When you're done with changes in this PR, just let me know, thanks!

anpint · 2019-03-04T21:42:51Z

@veronicagg The changes for this protocol have been finalized.

veronicagg · 2019-03-05T17:46:57Z

@anpint thanks, could you please review the CI failures for linter? Thanks!

… have the desired outcome)

anpint · 2019-03-05T18:43:12Z

@anpint thanks, could you please review the CI failures for linter? Thanks!

Sorry for not noticing the failures before. I wanted to define some properties in the protocol as both readonly and required, and it looks like that's not supported. I kept them as readonly.

veronicagg · 2019-03-06T00:20:37Z

Change looks good, this PR is composed of the new api-version with an already reviewed commit plus a few changes to the properties.
Do you still need to wait on afedyashov for review?
Are the APIs deployed? If so, I can approve and merge this PR.
Thanks!

anpint · 2019-03-06T00:25:05Z

Change looks good, this PR is composed of the new api-version with an already reviewed commit plus a few changes to the properties.

Yes, that's correct.

Do you still need to wait on afedyashov for review?

No, we don't need to wait. Initially he was going to add some changes to the protocol, but we dicided not to make further changes.

Are the APIs deployed? If so, I can approve and merge this PR.

Can you clarify this? Do you require having the 2019-02-01 API version already supported by our RP in production? This API version is currently making its way through our release pipeline, so it will be a few weeks before it hits production. As a general process, I would expect that swagger should be the first step in creating a new API version (so that the changes go through proper approvals before we implement them in our service). Is that not the case?

veronicagg · 2019-03-08T19:06:25Z

@anpint It's correct that the swagger is the first step, but we should have the APIs deployed in production before merging the PR. The reason is that once a swagger is merged in master, an SDK can get generated right away, and if the APIs are not available the SDKs won't work for customers. Hope that makes sense.
Let me know when the APIs are deployed and I can merge this PR. Thanks!

anpint · 2019-03-08T19:10:56Z

@anpint It's correct that the swagger is the first step, but we should have the APIs deployed in production before merging the PR. The reason is that once a swagger is merged in master, an SDK can get generated right away, and if the APIs are not available the SDKs won't work for customers. Hope that makes sense.
Let me know when the APIs are deployed and I can merge this PR. Thanks!

Ok, I understand now. I'll tag this PR as "Awaiting Deployment" and update it again once we have the new API version in production.

REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5210' REST Spec PR Author 'anpint' REST Spec PR Last commit

adxsdknet · 2019-03-26T19:04:02Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-net

A PR has been created for you:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-net#5596
.NET SDK Commits:
adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net@007d151

anpint · 2019-03-26T22:59:07Z

The service code that supports this new API version is now in our Canary regions, so we would like to go ahead and complete the PR. We will be rolling out the service to all production regions in the next few weeks.

veronicagg · 2019-03-27T17:26:05Z

@anpint ok, great. Due to my explanation above, we should not merge and release SDKs until the APIs are in production, please let me know when that's the case, for PR merge.

ankushbindlish2 · 2019-03-27T17:31:30Z

@veronicagg We are already LIVE in FLIGHT regions. Please merge this change. All SDKS would be publish only after ALL regions are LIVE.

REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5210' REST Spec PR Author 'anpint' REST Spec PR Last commit

anpint added 3 commits February 15, 2019 11:21

Adds base for updating Microsoft.StorageSync from version stable/2018…

1c94263

…-10-01 to version 2019-02-01

Updates readme

5530645

Updates API version in new specs and examples

1ce7334

anpint requested a review from ankushbindlish2 as a code owner February 15, 2019 19:24

ankushbindlish2 approved these changes Feb 15, 2019

View reviewed changes

AutorestCI mentioned this pull request Feb 15, 2019

[AutoPR storagesync/resource-manager] [Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01 Azure/azure-sdk-for-node#4691

Closed

anpint requested a review from afedyashov February 15, 2019 19:28

azuresdkci assigned veronicagg Feb 15, 2019

azuresdkci requested a review from veronicagg February 15, 2019 19:34

veronicagg suggested changes Feb 15, 2019

View reviewed changes

anpint changed the title ~~[Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01~~ [Hub Generated][Work in Progress] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01 Feb 19, 2019

update required properties for server endpoint sync status objects

86efec8

anpint changed the title ~~[Hub Generated][Work in Progress] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01~~ [Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01 Mar 4, 2019

remove "required" from some server endpoint health properties (didn't…

0a56b37

… have the desired outcome)

anpint changed the title ~~[Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01~~ [Awaiting Deployment][Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01 Mar 8, 2019

adxsdknet added a commit to adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2019

.NET SDK Resource Provider:'StorageSync'

9644e86

REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5210' REST Spec PR Author 'anpint' REST Spec PR Last commit

Update description of azureFileShareName property

38820f4

adxsdknet added a commit to adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2019

.NET SDK Resource Provider:'StorageSync'

007d151

REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5210' REST Spec PR Author 'anpint' REST Spec PR Last commit

Move 2019-02-01 to stable, clean up readme files

e5782a2

anpint changed the title ~~[Awaiting Deployment][Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01~~ [Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.StorageSync to add version 2019-02-01 Mar 26, 2019

anpint requested a review from veronicagg March 26, 2019 22:58

veronicagg approved these changes Mar 27, 2019

View reviewed changes

veronicagg merged commit 91d323b into master Mar 27, 2019

dsgouda pushed a commit to Azure/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request Mar 27, 2019

.NET SDK Resource Provider:'StorageSync' (#5596)

cbb5910

REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5210' REST Spec PR Author 'anpint' REST Spec PR Last commit

vladbarosan deleted the dev-storagesync-Microsoft.StorageSync-2019-02-01 branch March 28, 2019 22:43

anpint mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2019

.NET SDK Resource Provider:'StorageSync': version bump and test fixes Azure/azure-sdk-for-net#5625

Merged

anpint mentioned this pull request Apr 9, 2019

Az.StorageSync update for 2019-02-01 API version Azure/azure-powershell#8976

Merged

8 tasks

mentat9 pushed a commit to mentat9/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request Jun 10, 2019

.NET SDK Resource Provider:'StorageSync' (Azure#5596)

0bcd1e5

REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5210' REST Spec PR Author 'anpint' REST Spec PR Last commit

Conversation

anpint commented Feb 15, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Contribution checklist:

Uh oh!

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Automation for azure-sdk-for-ruby

Uh oh!

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Automation for azure-sdk-for-js

Uh oh!

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

Uh oh!

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Automation for azure-sdk-for-java

Uh oh!

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

Uh oh!

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

Uh oh!

azuresdkci commented Feb 15, 2019

Uh oh!

veronicagg commented Feb 15, 2019

Uh oh!

veronicagg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

anpint commented Feb 15, 2019

Uh oh!

veronicagg commented Feb 19, 2019

Uh oh!

anpint commented Feb 19, 2019

Uh oh!

veronicagg commented Feb 20, 2019

Uh oh!

veronicagg commented Feb 26, 2019

Uh oh!

anpint commented Mar 4, 2019

Uh oh!

veronicagg commented Mar 5, 2019

Uh oh!

anpint commented Mar 5, 2019

Uh oh!

veronicagg commented Mar 6, 2019

Uh oh!

anpint commented Mar 6, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

veronicagg commented Mar 8, 2019

Uh oh!

anpint commented Mar 8, 2019

Uh oh!

adxsdknet commented Mar 26, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-net

Uh oh!

anpint commented Mar 26, 2019

Uh oh!

veronicagg commented Mar 27, 2019

Uh oh!

ankushbindlish2 commented Mar 27, 2019

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

anpint commented Feb 15, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Feb 15, 2019 •

edited

Loading

anpint commented Mar 6, 2019 •

edited

Loading