Skip to content
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

Add OracleAzureDbPostgreSQLSync scenario and ServiceTask resource #5801

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 29, 2019

Conversation

huang91shu
Copy link
Contributor

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.

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Apr 30, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-ruby

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-ruby

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Apr 30, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#5417

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Apr 30, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#4897

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Apr 30, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-js

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-js

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Apr 30, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-java

Encountered a Subprocess error: (azure-sdk-for-java)

Command: ['/usr/local/bin/autorest', '/tmp/tmpdid1vabq/rest/specification/datamigration/resource-manager/readme.md', '--perform-load=false', '--swagger-to-sdk', '--output-artifact=configuration.json', '--input-file=foo', '--output-folder=/tmp/tmpfol95tqs']
Finished with return code 7
and output:

AutoRest code generation utility [version: 2.0.4283; node: v8.12.0]
(C) 2018 Microsoft Corporation.
https://aka.ms/autorest
Failure:
Error: Unable to start AutoRest Core from /root/.autorest/@[email protected]/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core
Error: Unable to start AutoRest Core from /root/.autorest/@[email protected]/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core
    at main (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/app.js:232:19)
    at <anonymous>

/root/.autorest/@[email protected]/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core/dist/app.js:33
    autorest_core_1.Shutdown();
    ^
ReferenceError: autorest_core_1 is not defined
    at process.on (/root/.autorest/@[email protected]/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core/dist/app.js:33:5)
    at emitOne (events.js:121:20)
    at process.emit (events.js:211:7)
    at process.emit (/node_modules/source-map-support/source-map-support.js:439:21)
fs.js:612
  return binding.close(fd);
                 ^

Error: EBADF: bad file descriptor, close
    at Object.fs.closeSync (fs.js:612:18)
    at StaticVolumeFile.shutdown (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/static-loader.js:352:10)
    at StaticFilesystem.shutdown (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/static-loader.js:406:17)
    at process.exit.n [as exit] (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/static-loader.js:169:11)
    at printErrorAndExit (/node_modules/source-map-support/source-map-support.js:423:11)
    at process.emit (/node_modules/source-map-support/source-map-support.js:435:16)
    at process._fatalException (bootstrap_node.js:391:26)

@azuresdkci
Copy link
Contributor

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

adxsdknet added a commit to adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2019
REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5801'
REST Spec PR Author 'huang91shu'
REST Spec PR Last commit
@dsgouda dsgouda added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Apr 30, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@dsgouda dsgouda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good for the most part left a couple of comments.
SInce these are not ARM resource operations, we can skip the review

@dsgouda dsgouda removed the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Apr 30, 2019
@huang91shu
Copy link
Contributor Author

Does anyone know how I can find what the error in the automated public.rest-api-specs failure is? I looked at the log but don't see anything wrong in the json. I ran the file through a validator and it seems to be correct too.

The error is "Path 'paths['/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{groupName}/providers/Microsoft.DataMigration/services/{serviceName}'].parameters', line 130, position 21." Cannot deserialize the current JSON array.

It seems to be complaining about the parameters for that path but the line number doesn't make sense. The parameters field is on line 107 and seems to formatted correctly.

adxsdknet added a commit to adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2019
REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5801'
REST Spec PR Author 'huang91shu'
REST Spec PR Last commit
@dsgouda
Copy link
Contributor

dsgouda commented May 16, 2019

@sarangan12 @sergey-shandar could you please take a look at the failures here

@huang91shu huang91shu force-pushed the master branch 3 times, most recently from 431a6fc to 5c209c2 Compare May 22, 2019 23:58
adxsdknet added a commit to adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request May 23, 2019
REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5801'
REST Spec PR Author 'huang91shu'
REST Spec PR Last commit
adxsdknet added a commit to adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request May 23, 2019
REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5801'
REST Spec PR Author 'huang91shu'
REST Spec PR Last commit
adxsdknet added a commit to adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request May 23, 2019
REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5801'
REST Spec PR Author 'huang91shu'
REST Spec PR Last commit
adxsdknet added a commit to adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request May 23, 2019
REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5801'
REST Spec PR Author 'huang91shu'
REST Spec PR Last commit
@sergey-shandar
Copy link
Contributor

@dsgouda could you reaise a bug for the diff tool https://github.com/Azure/openapi-diff/issues ?

@dsgouda
Copy link
Contributor

dsgouda commented May 23, 2019

@sergey-shandar I have approved the PR, if the build failures are bugs, please merge this

Copy link
Contributor

@dsgouda dsgouda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@huang91shu
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've added back all my original changes. I'm ready for merging other than the one failing test which we can't figure out. Thank you for the help looking into this.

adxsdknet added a commit to adxsdknet/azure-sdk-for-net that referenced this pull request May 28, 2019
REST Spec PR 'Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#5801'
REST Spec PR Author 'huang91shu'
REST Spec PR Last commit
@vchske
Copy link
Contributor

vchske commented May 29, 2019

Hello, I'm wondering if we could get eyes on this. There are some Powershell and CLI deliverables that are backed up behind this. Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants