Microsoft.DataProtection swagger changes #13334
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Hi, @zakinkh Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips. Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. [email protected] |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L2085 |
|
| The operation 'OperationResult_Get' returns 202 status code, which indicates a long running operation, please enable 'x-ms-long-running-operation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L64 |
|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'findrestorabletimeranges' in:'FindRestorableTimeRanges_Post'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L1654 |
|
| 'backupInstances' parameter lacks 'description' property. Consider adding a 'description' element. Accurate description is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L1671 |
|
| 'objectType' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L2072 |
|
| 'DppWorkerRequest' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3403 |
|
| 'subscriptionId' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3406 |
|
| 'uri' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3409 |
|
| 'headers' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3412 |
|
| 'supportedGroupVersions' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3421 |
️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️[Staging] Cross Version BreakingChange (Base on preview version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️[Staging] Cross Version BreakingChange (Base on stable version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️⚠️[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation: 12 Warnings warning [Detail]
Only 10 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'AzureBackupFindRestorableTimeRangesRequestResource' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'AzureBackupFindRestorableTimeRangesResponseResource' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'AzureBackupRecoveryPointResource' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'BackupInstanceResource' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'BackupVaultResource' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'BaseBackupPolicyResource' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'CloudError' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'Error' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'ErrorAdditionalInfo' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"dataprotection/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-02-preview", "details":"The schema 'JobExtendedInfo-additionalDetails' with an undefined type and additionalProperties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
️️✔️[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️[Staging] SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
ghost
added
the
customer-reported
|
Thank you for your contribution zakinkh! We will review the pull request and get back to you soon. |
|
Hi @zakinkh, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
|
Hi, @zakinkh your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board([email protected]). cc @raych1 |
|
We are not changing the API version as we are just addressing swagger for some new features and no clients/customers currently use this API version. So it is not a breaking change. |
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
* adding 202 GetOperationResult * added headers Co-authored-by: Mayank Aggarwal <[email protected]>
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
You don't really need to define the status check api for async operation. But here the response schema should follow RPC guideline. https://github.com/Azure/azure-resource-manager-rpc/blob/master/v1.0/Addendum.md#operation-resource-format Refers to: specification/dataprotection/resource-manager/Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-02-01-preview/examples/GetOperationResult.json:20 in 9b9b6bc. [](commit_id = 9b9b6bc, deletion_comment = False) |
j5lim
reviewed
Mar 11, 2021
| "responses": { | ||
| "200": { | ||
| "body": { | ||
| "id": "zblobbackuptestsa58", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"id [](start = 12, length = 3)
Is this ARM resource ID? Then it should be a full resource ID. https://armwiki.azurewebsites.net/introduction/concepts/resourceids.html
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a proxy resource and its an action on proxy resource so we are just returning the id of that resource.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
RP should always return ID as a fully qualified resource ID, which is the platform features (e.g. policy) expect. Since this is a POST action, it may be okay but please consider returning a full id in future.
j5lim
reviewed
Mar 11, 2021
| "resourceGroupName": "Blob-Backup", | ||
| "vaultName": "ZBlobBackupVaultBVTD3", | ||
| "backupInstances": "zblobbackuptestsa58", | ||
| "api-version": "2020-01-01-alpha", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
2020-01-01-alpha [](start = 22, length = 16)
Should be 2021-02-01-preview
j5lim
added
ARMChangesRequested
This is the response for Location header. For the response of azure-async header (GetOperationStatus) already follows the OperationResource format. |
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
This was referenced Mar 11, 2021
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
j5lim
approved these changes
Mar 11, 2021
j5lim
added
ARMSignedOff
|
Justification for not updating the version : we are not adding a new version since the current version is not being used by customers, we are stabilizing the current version for PowerShell testing for GA. |
@zakinkh , please follow above Action for the breaking change review. |
|
There are no SDK, PS, CLI generated for this api-version and also no customer is using this api-version. This is internal and only used for stabilizing swagger for GA. |
akning-ms
added
the
Approved-BreakingChange
This was referenced Mar 12, 2021
Closed
Closed
MirzaSikander
pushed a commit
to MirzaSikander/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 22, 2021
* Microsoft.DataProtection swagger changes * Added example file FindRestorableTimeRanges.json * Adding 202 GetOperationResult (Azure#1) * adding 202 GetOperationResult * added headers Co-authored-by: Mayank Aggarwal <[email protected]> * pr comments fixes * prettier fixes * adding fix for x-ms-error-response * Added missed DppWorkerRequest object in swagger json * Validation fixes * changes for request * removing objectType Co-authored-by: Mayank Aggarwal <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Mayank Aggarwal <[email protected]>
mkarmark
pushed a commit
to mkarmark/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2021
* Microsoft.DataProtection swagger changes * Added example file FindRestorableTimeRanges.json * Adding 202 GetOperationResult (Azure#1) * adding 202 GetOperationResult * added headers Co-authored-by: Mayank Aggarwal <[email protected]> * pr comments fixes * prettier fixes * adding fix for x-ms-error-response * Added missed DppWorkerRequest object in swagger json * Validation fixes * changes for request * removing objectType Co-authored-by: Mayank Aggarwal <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Mayank Aggarwal <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
Changelog
Please ensure to add changelog with this PR by answering the following questions.
Contribution checklist:
If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.
ARM API Review Checklist
Ensure to check this box if one of the following scenarios meet updates in the PR, so that label “WaitForARMFeedback” will be added automatically to involve ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs, all “removals” and “adding a new property” no more require ARM API review.
Please ensure you've reviewed following guidelines including ARM resource provider contract and REST guidelines. Estimated time (4 hours). This is required before you can request review from ARM API Review board.
If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged with urgency, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.
Breaking Change Review Checklist
If there are following updates in the PR, ensure to request an approval from Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.
Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.
Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.