Microsoft.ExtendedLocation/customLocations Swagger #13101
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
miosmian
requested review from
ArcturusZhang,
jsntcy,
msyyc and
qiaozha
as code owners
|
Hi, @miosmian 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. vsswagger@microsoft.com |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The delete operation is defined without a 200 or 204 error response implementation,please add it.' Location: Microsoft.ExtendedLocation/preview/2020-07-15-privatepreview/customlocations.json#L280 |
| The child tracked resource, 'enabledResourceTypes' with immediate parent 'customLocation', must have a list by immediate parent operation. Location: Microsoft.ExtendedLocation/preview/2020-07-15-privatepreview/customlocations.json#L473 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: isDataAction Location: Microsoft.ExtendedLocation/preview/2020-07-15-privatepreview/customlocations.json#L597 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Get Custom Location Location: Microsoft.ExtendedLocation/preview/2020-07-15-privatepreview/customlocations.json#L395 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Get Custom Location Location: Microsoft.ExtendedLocation/preview/2020-07-15-privatepreview/customlocations.json#L441 |
️️✔️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 pending [Detail]
️️✔️[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️⌛[Staging] SpellCheck pending [Detail]
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
"logUrl":"https://apidrop.visualstudio.com/Content%20CI/_build/results?buildId=196890&view=logs&j=fd490c07-0b22-5182-fac9-6d67fe1e939b", "detail":"Run.ps1 failed with exit code 128 " |
|
Hi @miosmian, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
|
Re-opening this now directly against the azure-rest-api-specs repository. Previously had sign-offs on the private repository and can be merged. @allenjzhang CC'ing you here |
This was referenced Feb 23, 2021
allenjzhang
approved these changes
Feb 23, 2021
|
@msyyc, the python track 2 automation was skipped. Can you take a look at the readme.python.md to see if any change is needed? |
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
This was referenced Feb 23, 2021
11 tasks
mkarmark
pushed a commit
to mkarmark/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2021
* save before rebase * rebase * recreating PR from private repo to be merged * updating python readme * remove readonly for consistency with internal repo - update python readme for sdk gen * after discussion - add back readonly on the systemdata
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.
Recreating this PR from the private repository: https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/pull/2984
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.