-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Users/vikottur/ws02 datasource auth #14932
Users/vikottur/ws02 datasource auth #14932
Conversation
Hi, @vikramkotturu 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] |
[Call for Action] To better understand Azure service dev/test scenario, and support Azure service developer better on Swagger and REST API related tests in early phase, please help to fill in with this survey https://aka.ms/SurveyForEarlyPhase. It will take 5 to 10 minutes. If you already complete survey, please neglect this comment. Thanks. |
Swagger Validation Report
|
Rule | Message |
---|---|
Per the Noun_Verb convention for Operation Ids, the noun 'BackupInstances' should not appear after the underscore. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L1803 |
|
'backupInstanceName' parameter lacks 'description' property. Consider adding a 'description' element. Accurate description is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L1552 |
|
'backupInstanceName' parameter lacks 'description' property. Consider adding a 'description' element. Accurate description is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L1619 |
|
'backupInstanceName' parameter lacks 'description' property. Consider adding a 'description' element. Accurate description is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L1686 |
|
'backupInstanceName' parameter lacks 'description' property. Consider adding a 'description' element. Accurate description is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L1753 |
|
'backupInstanceName' parameter lacks 'description' property. Consider adding a 'description' element. Accurate description is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L1820 |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Only 10 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
Rule | Message |
---|---|
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'AzureBackupFindRestorableTimeRangesRequestResource' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L2419 |
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'AzureBackupFindRestorableTimeRangesResponseResource' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L2449 |
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'AzureBackupRecoveryPointResource' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L2710 |
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'BackupInstanceResource' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3007 |
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'BackupVaultResource' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3130 |
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'BaseBackupPolicyResource' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3190 |
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'CloudError' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3388 |
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'Error' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3818 |
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'ErrorAdditionalInfo' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L3854 |
R4037 - MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'additionalDetails' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json#L4074 |
️️✔️
Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️
ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️
SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️
Cross-Version Breaking Changes succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
- Compared Swaggers (Based on Oad v0.8.11)
- current:preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json compared with base:preview/2021-02-01-preview/dataprotection.json
- current:preview/2021-06-01-preview/dataprotection.json compared with base:stable/2021-01-01/dataprotection.json
️️✔️
CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️🔄
[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation inProgress [Detail]
️️✔️
[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️
[Staging] SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️
[Staging] Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
Thank you for your contribution vikramkotturu! We will review the pull request and get back to you soon. |
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
"secretStoreType": { | ||
"description": "Gets or sets the type of secret store", | ||
"enum": [ | ||
"Invalid", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why is 'Invalid' type here? Consider removing it as 'InvalidType' for a secret store doesn't make sense.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
"BackupVaults" | ||
], | ||
"description": "Returns resource collection belonging to a resource group.", | ||
"operationId": "BackupVaults_GetInResourceGroup", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This should be
"operationId": "BackupVaults_GetInResourceGroup", | |
"operationId": "BackupVaults_List", |
"BackupVaults" | ||
], | ||
"description": "Returns resource collection belonging to a subscription.", | ||
"operationId": "BackupVaults_GetInSubscription", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This should be
"operationId": "BackupVaults_GetInSubscription", | |
"operationId": "BackupVaults_ListBySubscription", |
"BackupInstances" | ||
], | ||
"description": "Validate whether adhoc backup will be successful or not", | ||
"operationId": "BackupInstances_ValidateForBackup", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Consider the path of this operation, should this be
"operationId": "BackupInstances_ValidateForBackup", | |
"operationId": "BackupVaults_ValidateForBackup", |
"tags": [ | ||
"FindRestorableTimeRanges" | ||
], | ||
"operationId": "RestorableTimeRanges_Find", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could this be
"operationId": "RestorableTimeRanges_Find", | |
"operationId": "BackupInstances_FindRestorableTimeRanges", |
"AzureBackupJob" | ||
], | ||
"description": "Triggers export of jobs and returns an OperationID to track.", | ||
"operationId": "ExportJobs_Trigger", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could this be
"operationId": "ExportJobs_Trigger", | |
"operationId": "BackupVaults_TriggerExportJobs", |
* Created base 2021-06-01-preview a copy of 2021-02-01-preview. * Added my changes to support datasource auth credentials ontop of the base from previous version. * Fixed as issue with FindRestorableTimeRanges.json example.
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.