Discrepancy of generation from tsp and swagger for resource name property

[tadelesh]

Current tsp, we define a resource name property in the final resource model, not inherit it from the base resource model. This will cause the name property in the generated code for JS and Python to be breaking.

For example, a FooResource defined as:

typespec-azure/packages/typespec-azure-resource-manager/test/resource.test.ts

Lines 49 to 56 in a156385

	@doc("Foo resource")
	model FooResource is TrackedResource<FooResourceProperties> {
	@doc("Foo name")
	@key("fooName")
	@segment("foos")
	@path
	name: string;
	}

It is sourced from TrackedResource template:

typespec-azure/packages/typespec-azure-resource-manager/lib/models.tsp

Lines 17 to 25 in a156385

	@doc("Concrete tracked resource types can be created by aliasing this type using a specific property type.")
	@armResourceInternal(Properties)
	@includeInapplicableMetadataInPayload(false)
	model TrackedResource<Properties extends {}> extends TrackedResourceBase {
	@doc("The resource-specific properties for this resource.")
	@visibility("read", "create")
	@extension("x-ms-client-flatten", true)
	properties?: Properties;
	}

Which is derived from TrackedResourceBase model:

typespec-azure/packages/typespec-azure-resource-manager/lib/arm.foundations.tsp

Lines 49 to 55 in a156385

	model TrackedResourceBase extends ArmResource {
	@doc("The geo-location where the resource lives")
	@visibility("read", "create")
	location: string;
	...ArmTagsProperty;
	}

Which is derived from ArmResource model:

typespec-azure/packages/typespec-azure-resource-manager/lib/arm.foundations.tsp

Lines 22 to 37 in a156385

	@doc("Common properties for all Azure Resource Manager resources.")
	model ArmResource extends ArmResourceBase {
	@doc("Fully qualified resource ID for the resource. Ex - /subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/{resourceProviderNamespace}/{resourceType}/{resourceName}")
	@visibility("read")
	id: string;
	// The name property must be included by the resource type author!
	@doc("The type of the resource. E.g. \"Microsoft.Compute/virtualMachines\" or \"Microsoft.Storage/storageAccounts\"")
	@visibility("read")
	type: string;
	@doc("Azure Resource Manager metadata containing createdBy and modifiedBy information.")
	@visibility("read")
	systemData?: SystemData;
	}

You could see name property is defined in FooResource, not in ArmResource.

But with swagger common-types, the name is defined in the root Resource model:
https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/84849e5293de3a8e01cbdde13b2d7086d3fb34d6/specification/common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L9-L37

[tadelesh]

One real issue from service team: Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#27565 (comment)

[markcowl]

@tadelesh I don't think the referenced spec is actually blocked by this, because it cannot use the resource templates in any case, due to the resource type inheriance form TrackedResource or ProxyResource. The only way to represent this API without breaks is to use a custom-defined resource type, as shown in this playground

Note that this will be a problem for new specs that were originally introduced in TypeSpec, or any specs that use resource types that directly inherit from ProxyResource of TrackedResource (a small list). This problem should be addressed by this issue: https://github.com/Azure/typespec-azure-pr/issues/3873

[tadelesh]

@tadelesh I don't think the referenced spec is actually blocked by this, because it cannot use the resource templates in any case, due to the resource type inheriance form TrackedResource or ProxyResource. The only way to represent this API without breaks is to use a custom-defined resource type, as shown in this playground

Note that this will be a problem for new specs that were originally introduced in TypeSpec, or any specs that use resource types that directly inherit from ProxyResource of TrackedResource (a small list). This problem should be addressed by this issue: Azure/typespec-azure-pr#3873

Then how should emitter deal with the ArmResource model in different namespace? In swagger, we will ask service team to choose either use common types or use self-defined base resource models to prevent duplicate schema. I'm afraid it will happen again in TypeSpec?

[allenjzhang]

Pending design issue:

https://github.com/Azure/typespec-azure-pr/issues/3873

[allenjzhang]

#661 Merged

[tadelesh]

cc: @pshao25 pay attention to this change. convertor need to adopt the change.

[pshao25]

cc: @pshao25 pay attention to this change. convertor need to adopt the change.

Will do after it releases.