Policy Updates for new version by pratimaupadhyay02 · Pull Request #7699 · Azure/azure-rest-api-specs

pratimaupadhyay02 · 2019-11-04T07:40:23Z

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:

I have reviewed the documentation for the workflow.
Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.
The OpenAPI Hub was used for checking validation status and next steps.

ARM API Review Checklist

Service team MUST add the "WaitForARMFeedback" label if the management plane API changes fall into one of the below categories.
adding/removing APIs.
adding/removing properties.
adding/removing API-version.
adding a new service in Azure.

Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs.

If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged urgently, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.
Please follow the link to find more details on API review process.

msftclas · 2019-11-04T07:40:38Z

All CLA requirements met.

AutorestCI · 2019-11-04T07:41:22Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

A PR has been created for you:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#9013

AutorestCI · 2019-11-04T07:42:51Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

A PR has been created for you:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#6246

azuresdkci · 2019-11-04T08:09:18Z

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

ravbhatnagar · 2019-11-14T00:56:09Z

@pratimaupadhyay02 removing APIs from stable api-version is a breaking change. The Azure API deprecation process must be followed before APIs can be deprecated.

pratimaupadhyay02 · 2019-11-14T05:58:08Z

removing APIs from stable api-version is a breaking change. The Azure API deprecation process must be followed before APIs can be deprecated.

We are not removing this api version completely. We are just upgrading the api version with this SDK release. This is not deprecation.

ravbhatnagar · 2019-11-16T10:10:10Z

not sure what the issue is. Is the GitHub diff messed up? It is showing bunch of APIs in red.

adit-t · 2019-11-18T06:35:06Z

not sure what the issue is. Is the GitHub diff messed up? It is showing bunch of APIs in red.

Hey @ravbhatnagar . We are a little lost here. Are you saying we cannot move APIs across version from one SDK version to another? Just to reiterate, we are not removing these APIs. We are just bumping up their version. We had done this just a month back for more than 20 APIs. So, what's the issue you're talking about? Are we missing something here?

erich-wang · 2019-11-22T00:06:14Z

@ravbhatnagar, could you please respond?

ravbhatnagar · 2019-11-26T12:31:53Z

@pratimaupadhyay02 @TAdityaAnirudh - you can add apis to a newer api-version. But that does not mean you can remove apis from an existing api-version. If you want these apis to be supported in a newer api-version, create a new api-version and add them there. They must not be removed from existing GA api-version, which I am assuming these are.
I am assuming that you are not planning to deprecate the older api-version from where these APIs are being removed. Please correct me if my understanding is not accurate.
Does that make sense?

pratimaupadhyay02 · 2019-11-27T11:58:31Z

@pratimaupadhyay02 @TAdityaAnirudh - you can add apis to a newer api-version. But that does not mean you can remove apis from an existing api-version. If you want these apis to be supported in a newer api-version, create a new api-version and add them there. They must not be removed from existing GA api-version, which I am assuming these are. Does that make sense?

@ravbhatnagar We tried retaining the APIs in the existing GA-api version. Compilation of specs fails in that case. So it's not an option.
The changes in this PR are very similar to another PR we checked in around a month back.
https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/pull/7345/files
Has anything changed within this one month?
The older version is still active and is still supported. Any customer who uses an older version of Nuget can use that API version. We are not deprecating an API version with this. We just want our customers to use the latest version for these APIs. So, we are moving these around.
We can setup a call and discuss this if required.

ravbhatnagar · 2019-11-28T10:18:39Z

please work with @sanjaiganesh as he is the current API review oncall.

KrisBash · 2019-12-05T05:38:54Z

@pratimaupadhyay02 please do not remove active APIs from prior versions. Users must be able to use all supported API versions in latest SDK builds

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-05T10:07:19Z

Pull request contains merge conflicts.

This reverts commit 9321d73.

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-05T10:31:27Z

Pull request contains merge conflicts.

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-05T12:19:46Z

Pull request contains merge conflicts.

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-05T17:03:24Z

Comment was made before the most recent commit for PR 7699 in repo Azure/azure-rest-api-specs

This reverts commit c3b1463.

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-09T06:45:05Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-09T08:33:59Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-09T08:42:26Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-09T08:57:43Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-09T09:44:01Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

This reverts commit 77c7bd5.

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-09T11:43:38Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-10T05:24:50Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

erich-wang · 2019-12-11T09:47:53Z

@KrisBash , please help to review again, thanks.

anthony-c-martin

Please could you describe the changes you're making with this PR? When I diff bms.json against the previous version (2019-05-13), I see virtually no changes - is that intentional?

diff --git "a/2019-05-13\\bms.json" "b/2019-06-15\\bms.json"
index 24274a9..a77e080 100644
--- "a/2019-05-13\\bms.json"
+++ "b/2019-06-15\\bms.json"
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "swagger": "2.0",
   "info": {
-    "version": "2019-05-13",
+    "version": "2019-06-15",
     "title": "RecoveryServicesBackupClient",
     "x-ms-code-generation-settings": {
       "internalConstructors": false
@@ -3141,6 +3141,17 @@
       },
       "x-ms-discriminator-value": "GenericProtectionPolicy"
     },
+    "InstantRPAdditionalDetails": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "azureBackupRGNamePrefix": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "azureBackupRGNameSuffix": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      }
+    },
     "GenericProtectedItem": {
       "description": "Base class for backup items.",
       "type": "object",
@@ -4080,6 +4091,9 @@
     },
     "ProtectedItem": {
       "description": "Base class for backup items.",
+      "required": [
+        "protectedItemType"
+      ],
       "type": "object",
       "properties": {
         "protectedItemType": {

anthony-c-martin · 2019-12-13T06:35:19Z

specification/recoveryservicesbackup/resource-manager/readme.md

 ``` yaml $(tag) == 'package-2019-05'
 input-file:
- Microsoft.RecoveryServices/stable/2019-05-13/bms.json
+- Microsoft.RecoveryServices/stable/2019-06-15/bms.json


Please keep the old entry (2019-05-13) in-place

Retained the old entry and created a new package (2019-06) which contains all the APIs.

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-13T07:15:29Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

pratimaupadhyay02 · 2019-12-13T08:46:45Z

Please could you describe the changes you're making with this PR? When I diff bms.json against the previous version (2019-05-13), I see virtually no changes - is that intentional?
diff --git "a/2019-05-13\bms.json" "b/2019-06-15\bms.json"
index 24274a9..a77e080 100644
--- "a/2019-05-13\bms.json"
+++ "b/2019-06-15\bms.json"
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
{
"swagger": "2.0",
"info": {

"version": "2019-05-13",
"version": "2019-06-15",
"title": "RecoveryServicesBackupClient",
"x-ms-code-generation-settings": {
"internalConstructors": false
@@ -3141,6 +3141,17 @@
},
"x-ms-discriminator-value": "GenericProtectionPolicy"
},

"InstantRPAdditionalDetails": {
 "type": "object",
 "properties": {
   "azureBackupRGNamePrefix": {
     "type": "string"
   },
   "azureBackupRGNameSuffix": {
     "type": "string"
   }
 }
},
"GenericProtectedItem": {
"description": "Base class for backup items.",
"type": "object",
@@ -4080,6 +4091,9 @@
},
"ProtectedItem": {
"description": "Base class for backup items.",
 "required": [
   "protectedItemType"
 ],
 "type": "object",
 "properties": {
   "protectedItemType": {

Yeah it is intentional. We are just adding the property RGNamePrefix and RGNameSuffix in AzureIaasVmProtectionPolicy and this contains the changes related to it only. Other than that we are bumping up the version of all the APIs to 2019-06-15.

anthony-c-martin · 2019-12-13T17:12:05Z

Yeah it is intentional. We are just adding the property RGNamePrefix and RGNameSuffix in AzureIaasVmProtectionPolicy and this contains the changes related to it only. Other than that we are bumping up the version of all the APIs to 2019-06-15.

Thanks for the explanation! I see that InstantRPAdditionalDetails is being added as a definition but isn't being referenced anywhere (so I don't think it's going to have any effect on the shape of the API). Should it be referenced as a property on the AzureIaasVmProtectionPolicy definition?

azure-pipelines · 2019-12-13T17:36:52Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

anthony-c-martin

LGTM, thanks!

Policy Updates for new version

9068b6e

azuresdkci assigned erich-wang Nov 4, 2019

azuresdkci requested a review from erich-wang November 4, 2019 07:41

AutorestCI mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2019

[AutoPR recoveryservicesbackup/resource-manager] Policy Updates for new version Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#6246

Closed

erich-wang added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Nov 5, 2019

Moving ProtectionPolicies_Delete from 2016-12-01 to 2019-06-15

87bcb94

AutorestCI mentioned this pull request Nov 6, 2019

[AutoPR recoveryservicesbackup/resource-manager] Policy Updates for new version Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#8445

Closed

ravbhatnagar added the ARMChangesRequested label Nov 14, 2019

Updating to new version 2019-06-15

9321d73

Revert "Updating to new version 2019-06-15"

0221317

This reverts commit 9321d73.

Updating to new version 2019-06-15

c368b75

Merge branch 'master' into master

00b1cd5

AutorestCI mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2019

[AutoPR recoveryservicesbackup/resource-manager] Policy Updates for new version Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#9013

Closed

Revert "Fix for semantic failure"

ddec4b1

This reverts commit c3b1463.

openapi-sdkautomation bot mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2019

[AutoPR @azure/arm-recoveryservicesbackup] Policy Updates for new version AzureSDKAutomation/azure-sdk-for-js#88

Closed

Updating 2019-05-13 to 2019-06-15

52f2805

Semantic failure fix

d6708fb

Updates to existing version

648da00

Dummy change

77c7bd5

Revert "Dummy change"

6ecc998

This reverts commit 77c7bd5.

Updating default version to 2019-05

f7c39be

erich-wang removed the ARMChangesRequested label Dec 11, 2019

anthony-c-martin requested changes Dec 13, 2019

View reviewed changes

Retaining old entry(2019-05-13) and creating new package (2019-06)

0f5500c

Update

b856f19

anthony-c-martin added 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 labels Dec 13, 2019

anthony-c-martin approved these changes Dec 13, 2019

View reviewed changes

erich-wang merged commit d4f44d9 into Azure:master Dec 14, 2019

ChenTanyi mentioned this pull request Jan 9, 2020

Update readme.java.md with new tag #8086

Closed

5 tasks

Comments

Conversation

pratimaupadhyay02 commented Nov 4, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Latest improvements:

Contribution checklist:

ARM API Review Checklist

Uh oh!

msftclas commented Nov 4, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

AutorestCI commented Nov 4, 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 Nov 4, 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 Nov 4, 2019

Uh oh!

ravbhatnagar commented Nov 14, 2019

Uh oh!

pratimaupadhyay02 commented Nov 14, 2019

Uh oh!

ravbhatnagar commented Nov 16, 2019

Uh oh!

adit-t commented Nov 18, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

erich-wang commented Nov 22, 2019

Uh oh!

ravbhatnagar commented Nov 26, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

pratimaupadhyay02 commented Nov 27, 2019

Uh oh!

ravbhatnagar commented Nov 28, 2019

Uh oh!

KrisBash commented Dec 5, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 5, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 5, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 5, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 5, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 9, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 9, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 9, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 9, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 9, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 9, 2019

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 10, 2019

Uh oh!

erich-wang commented Dec 11, 2019

Uh oh!

anthony-c-martin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

anthony-c-martin Dec 13, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pratimaupadhyay02 Dec 13, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Dec 13, 2019

Uh oh!

pratimaupadhyay02 commented Dec 13, 2019

Uh oh!

anthony-c-martin commented Dec 13, 2019

Uh oh!

pratimaupadhyay02 commented Nov 4, 2019 •

edited

Loading

msftclas commented Nov 4, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Nov 4, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Nov 4, 2019 •

edited

Loading

adit-t commented Nov 18, 2019 •

edited

Loading

ravbhatnagar commented Nov 26, 2019 •

edited

Loading