Add deployment APIs for Microsoft.Resources#5737
Add deployment APIs for Microsoft.Resources#5737sergey-shandar merged 13 commits intoAzure:masterfrom
Conversation
Automation for azure-sdk-for-rubyNothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-ruby |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-pythonThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-goThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
nschonni
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Suggestions will probably look off unless you look at them on the file tab. It's just some camelCase stuff
| "x-ms-skip-url-encoding": true | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| "tagName": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
gave it a try, but this seems to be a breaking change... I'm not sure if we can change it.
| "x-ms-skip-url-encoding": true | ||
| }, | ||
| { | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| "tagValue": { |
|
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-jsA PR has been created for you based on this PR content. Once this PR will be merged, content will be added to your service PR: |
REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5737' REST Spec PR Author 'Tiano2017' REST Spec PR Last commit
Automation for azure-sdk-for-netA PR has been created for you: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-javaEncountered a Subprocess error: (azure-sdk-for-java)
Command: ['/usr/local/bin/autorest', '/tmp/tmp8fwf786y/rest/specification/resources/resource-manager/readme.md', '--perform-load=false', '--swagger-to-sdk', '--output-artifact=configuration.json', '--input-file=foo', '--output-folder=/tmp/tmpvtix_ecy'] AutoRest code generation utility [version: 2.0.4283; node: v8.12.0]
(C) 2018 Microsoft Corporation.
https://aka.ms/autorest
Failure:
Error: Unable to start AutoRest Core from /root/.autorest/@microsoft.azure_autorest-core@2.0.4373/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core
Error: Unable to start AutoRest Core from /root/.autorest/@microsoft.azure_autorest-core@2.0.4373/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core
at main (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/app.js:232:19)
at <anonymous>
/root/.autorest/@microsoft.azure_autorest-core@2.0.4373/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core/dist/app.js:33
autorest_core_1.Shutdown();
^
ReferenceError: autorest_core_1 is not defined
at process.on (/root/.autorest/@microsoft.azure_autorest-core@2.0.4373/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core/dist/app.js:33:5)
at emitOne (events.js:121:20)
at process.emit (events.js:211:7)
at process.emit (/node_modules/source-map-support/source-map-support.js:439:21)
fs.js:612
return binding.close(fd);
^
Error: EBADF: bad file descriptor, close
at Object.fs.closeSync (fs.js:612:18)
at StaticVolumeFile.shutdown (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/static-loader.js:352:10)
at StaticFilesystem.shutdown (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/static-loader.js:406:17)
at process.exit.n [as exit] (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/static-loader.js:169:11)
at printErrorAndExit (/node_modules/source-map-support/source-map-support.js:423:11)
at process.emit (/node_modules/source-map-support/source-map-support.js:435:16)
at process._fatalException (bootstrap_node.js:391:26) |
I wonder if we should refactor this into a parameter we reference like the others. If you agree to do it, we probably should only do it in 2019-05-01. #Closed Refers to: specification/resources/resource-manager/Microsoft.Resources/stable/2019-05-01/resources.json:117 in 561b51c. [](commit_id = 561b51c, deletion_comment = False) |
I was referring to what MG group team did for their APIs. They use "groupId" for this parameter.. In reply to: 485941229 [](ancestors = 485941229) Refers to: specification/resources/resource-manager/Microsoft.Resources/stable/2019-05-01/resources.json:3884 in dff86dc. [](commit_id = dff86dc, deletion_comment = False) |
|
@Tiano2017, the |
|
@Tiano2017 does this PR has the new operation that we discussed offline? |
Not yet.. Let me close on that and will let you know once it's ready for review. |
| } | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| "/providers/Microsoft.Management/managementGroups/{groupId}/providers/Microsoft.Resources/deployments/{deploymentName}": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Tiano2017 let's make the parameter token consistent across all operations
let's make it managementGroupId as mentioned on line 215
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sure. actually we want "groupId" as the parameter name, but I'll make it consistent in the file.
| "in": "path", | ||
| "required": true, | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "The resource t |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Tiano2017 make this managementGroupId in order to be consistent with the parameter being used in operation paths.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
will make everywhere "groupId".
| "in": "path", | ||
| "required": true, | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "The resource t |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: can you make the description as Name of the deployement, remove leading "the"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll leave it. BTW, you can do a compare with my first iteration to see what I changed. Basically the first iteration was copied from the previous version.
| "in": "path", | ||
| "required": true, | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "The resource t |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: can you make the description as "target subscription Id" instead of leading with "The"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
will leave them since it's copied from the previous version.
| "in": "path", | ||
| "required": true, | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "The resource t |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: remove leading "the"
| "in": "path", | ||
| "required": true, | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "The resource t |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: Get Deployment Operation Id
| "in": "path", | ||
| "required": true, | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "The name of the deployment.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: name of the deployment
| "swagger": "2.0", | ||
| "info": { | ||
| "title": "ResourceManagementClient", | ||
| "version": "2018-05-01", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So we had this API version? That's bad. I assume, now we may have some SDK breaking changes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we haven't released any package with this swagger, so I think it's still fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Tiano2017 as far as I know, if the spec was merged to master, some SDK packages could be released.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure what's the right approach here. This change is more like fixing a bug, and I assume it's only going to impact future versions of packages. can we assume it's safe in that case?
# Conflicts: # specification/resources/resource-manager/readme.md
|
@shahabhijeet could you have a look one more time. |
|
@Tiano2017 lost entire context :), will sync with @sergey-shandar and will get back on this PR by EOD today. |
Latest improvements:
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
Contribution checklist:
ARM API Review Checklist
Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs.
Please follow the link to find more details on API review process.