release for netapp mgmt #8451
release for netapp mgmt #8451
Conversation
| /** | ||
| * List of Mount Targets | ||
| */ | ||
| export interface MountTargetList { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is expected.Azure/azure-rest-api-specs@adf5808#diff-4f53ea72e2650e22c8b0ee2770c55654L2432 they remove the definition in their previous swagger PR
|
@qiaozha, @dw511214992, @RodgeFu, For future reference, I don't believe this change needed a major version update. The net changes here were
In a previous PR #8182 all public usage of |
|
Also, looks like this PR was created for the Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#9078. By the time the PR was approved, the swagger had changed due to a bug fix. See Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#9294. Due to this, we now have another PR #9198 where the major version of the package had to be updated again. With that, we come to 4 major version updates to this package in 2020. Can we ensure we be a little careful with
Moving forward, it would also be helpful if the PR description has link to the swagger specification change that is resulting in the re-generation Since version 9.0.0 of the package is buggy and the fix in the swagger was deemed as "urgent fix", can we consider deprecating the 9.0.0 version once 10.0.0 is released? Individual versions can be deprecated such that any current user would start getting warnings. |
Just wondering what if the user specifically import the model definition like the one in this issue? #7468 (comment) |
|
That is a good point. In that case, I would have recommended to keep the interface lying around and do a minor version update for the changes to Basically, I am looking through the lens of the user. Everytime we do a major version update, the imrpovements in that and all future PRs are lost to users of current version. So, doing some checks on our side might be beneficial |
No description provided.