Skip to content

Add new ANF API 2019-11-01#8164

Merged
PhoenixHe-NV merged 11 commits intoAzure:masterfrom
leonardbf:master
Jan 24, 2020
Merged

Add new ANF API 2019-11-01#8164
PhoenixHe-NV merged 11 commits intoAzure:masterfrom
leonardbf:master

Conversation

@leonardbf
Copy link
Contributor

@leonardbf leonardbf commented Jan 15, 2020

Removal of mount target list operation and change to response properties.
Addition of site property.
Removal of snapshot tags property.
Add missing revert volume to snapshot.
Amend property in authorize example.
Other minor amendments.
(Internal ticket ANF-567)

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.

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@leonardbf
Copy link
Contributor Author

@iscai-msft you were a suggested reviewer but I also have a question. I'm wondering why the pipeline shows some checks were not successful even though no steps actually show as failed. Do you know why this is? One does show as cancelled. Do you know why this one is cancelled?

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

1 similar comment
@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@openapi-sdkautomation
Copy link

openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jan 17, 2020

azure-sdk-for-go - Release

️✔️ succeeded [Logs] [Expand Details]

@openapi-sdkautomation
Copy link

openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jan 17, 2020

@openapi-sdkautomation
Copy link

openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jan 17, 2020

azure-sdk-for-net - Release

failed [Logs] [Expand Details]
  • Generate from dbeec79 with merge commit 145ff62. SDK Automation 13.0.17.20191226.1
    [AutoRest] realpath(): Permission denied
    [AutoRest] realpath(): Permission denied
    [AutoRest] realpath(): Permission denied
    [AutoRest] realpath(): Permission denied
    [AutoRest] realpath(): Permission denied
    [AutoRest] realpath(): Permission denied
  • Microsoft.Azure.Management.NetApp [Logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      Failed to create the package Microsoft.Azure.Management.NetApp.
      Error: dotnet msbuild build.proj /t:CreateNugetPackage /p:Scope=netapp /v:n /p:SkipTests=true , {} 

    @openapi-sdkautomation
    Copy link

    openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jan 17, 2020

    azure-sdk-for-python - Release

    ️✔️ succeeded [Logs] [Expand Details]
    • ️✔️ Generate from dbeec79 with merge commit 145ff62. SDK Automation 13.0.17.20191226.1
    • ️✔️azure-mgmt-netapp [Logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      [build_package] /usr/lib/python3.6/distutils/dist.py:261: UserWarning: Unknown distribution option: 'long_description_content_type'
      [build_package]   warnings.warn(msg)
      [build_package] /usr/lib/python3.6/distutils/dist.py:261: UserWarning: Unknown distribution option: 'long_description_content_type'
      [build_package]   warnings.warn(msg)

    @openapi-sdkautomation
    Copy link

    openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jan 17, 2020

    azure-sdk-for-js - Release

    ️✔️ succeeded [Logs] [Expand Details]
    • ️✔️ Generate from dbeec79 with merge commit 145ff62. SDK Automation 13.0.17.20191226.1
    • ️✔️@azure/arm-netapp [Logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      [npmPack] npm WARN deprecated rollup-plugin-node-resolve@5.2.0: This package has been deprecated and is no longer maintained. Please use @rollup/plugin-node-resolve.
      [npmPack] loaded rollup.config.js with warnings
      [npmPack] (!) Unused external imports
      [npmPack] default imported from external module 'rollup' but never used
      [npmPack] 
      [npmPack] ./esm/azureNetAppFilesManagementClient.js → ./dist/arm-netapp.js...
      [npmPack] created ./dist/arm-netapp.js in 384ms

    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

    @PhoenixHe-NV PhoenixHe-NV added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Jan 17, 2020
    }
    },
    "/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.NetApp/netAppAccounts/{accountName}/capacityPools/{poolName}/volumes/{volumeName}/revert": {
    "post": {
    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

    The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

    post [](start = 7, length = 4)

    you are missing the x-ms-long-running-operation annotation - please take a look at https://github.com/Azure/autorest/blob/master/docs/extensions/readme.md#x-ms-long-running-operation

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

    The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

    Yes. This was also pointed out in the review for the previous swagger which was accepted. We created an open internal ticket on this issue to investigate.

    The fact is that adding this results in a failure from the autorest validation 'ERROR (LongRunningResponseStatusCode/R2005/SDKViolation): A 'POST' operation 'Volumes_Revert' with x-ms-long-running-operation extension must have a valid terminal success status code 200 or 201 or 204.'

    But perhaps you have some idea how to solve this?

    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

    The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

    Yup. Due to limitations of the current version of OpenAPiSpec (aka Swagger), we don't have a good way of modeling the final response on a long running operation (the response on the GET on the async operation URL).

    The, somewhat counterintuitive, workaround is to add a 200 response to this path. By convention the code generator will understand that your service is not returning the 200 response for this POST, but that this is the final operation result instead. Does that make sense?


    In reply to: 369432464 [](ancestors = 369432464)

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

    The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

    So I just need to add a (dummy) 200 response block. I'll update.

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

    The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

    @majastrz Update made. But I notice some validation checks did not run.

    Copy link
    Member

    @majastrz majastrz left a comment

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

    The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

    Please take a look at the comment I added.

    Correct long running operations - add dummy terminal 200 state
    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

    @majastrz majastrz added ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review and removed ARMChangesRequested WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Jan 24, 2020
    Copy link
    Member

    @majastrz majastrz left a comment

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

    The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

    Signed off from ARM side.

    @majastrz
    Copy link
    Member

    @NullMDR any idea why some of the checks got cancelled? How do we restart them?

    @PhoenixHe-NV
    Copy link

    /azp run automation - sdk

    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

    @leonardbf
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Any chance this could be merged? I see there is a failure however but it seems to be a problem of the job not the swagger "Failed to run SDK Automation: Error: SDK Automation failed"

    @PhoenixHe-NV PhoenixHe-NV merged commit 145ff62 into Azure:master Jan 24, 2020
    ssripadham pushed a commit to ssripadham/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2020
    * ANF-567 add API 2019-11-01
    
    * ANF-567 add API 2019-11-01
    
    * Update netapp.json
    
    Prettier
    
    * ANF-567 add API 2019-11-01
    
    * ANF-567 add API 2019-11-01
    
    * ANF-567 add new API 2019-11-01
    Correct long running operations - add dummy terminal 200 state
    00Kai0 pushed a commit to 00Kai0/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2020
    * ANF-567 add API 2019-11-01
    
    * ANF-567 add API 2019-11-01
    
    * Update netapp.json
    
    Prettier
    
    * ANF-567 add API 2019-11-01
    
    * ANF-567 add API 2019-11-01
    
    * ANF-567 add new API 2019-11-01
    Correct long running operations - add dummy terminal 200 state
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

    Labels

    ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review

    Projects

    None yet

    Development

    Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

    3 participants