Adding StandardSSD_LRS as a valid Storage Account Type to TargetExtendedLocations #22255
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
Merging Into Fork
MSFT-BrianEddy
requested review from
Sandido,
dkulkarni-ms,
haagha,
madewithsmiles,
MS-syh2qs,
grizzlytheodore and
hyonholee
as code owners
|
Hi, @MSFT-BrianEddy 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. vscswagger@microsoft.com |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| compared swaggers (via Oad v0.10.4)] | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| gallery.json | 2021-10-01(bcba3af) | 2021-10-01(main) |
| gallery.json | 2022-01-03(bcba3af) | 2022-01-03(main) |
| gallery.json | 2022-03-03(bcba3af) | 2022-03-03(main) |
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The new version is adding enum value(s) 'StandardSSD_LRS' from the old version. New: GalleryRP/stable/2021-10-01/gallery.json#L2562:9 Old: GalleryRP/stable/2021-10-01/gallery.json#L2562:9 |
|
The new version is adding enum value(s) 'StandardSSD_LRS' from the old version. New: GalleryRP/stable/2022-01-03/gallery.json#L2447:9 Old: GalleryRP/stable/2022-01-03/gallery.json#L2447:9 |
|
The new version is adding enum value(s) 'StandardSSD_LRS' from the old version. New: GalleryRP/stable/2022-03-03/gallery.json#L2560:9 Old: GalleryRP/stable/2022-03-03/gallery.json#L2560:9 |
️️✔️Breaking Change(Cross-Version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️🔄LintDiff inProgress [Detail]
️⚠️Avocado: 1 Warnings warning [Detail]
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| The default tag contains multiple API versions swaggers. readme: specification/compute/resource-manager/readme.md tag: specification/compute/resource-manager/readme.md#tag-package-2022-11-01 |
️️✔️ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️⚠️~[Staging] ServiceAPIReadinessTest: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
API Test is not triggered due to precheck failure. Check pipeline log for details.
️❌~[Staging] SwaggerAPIView: 0 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
️️✔️~[Staging] CadlAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️❌ModelValidation: 177 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️PoliCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passed for PoliCheck.
️️✔️PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
️️✔️CadlValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for CadlValidation.
️️✔️PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Summary.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
ghost
added
the
Generated ApiView
|
This was referenced Jan 20, 2023
|
Hi @MSFT-BrianEddy, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
This was referenced Jan 20, 2023
|
@MSFT-BrianEddy adding to an existing enum is a breaking change. could you provide justification for @JeffreyRichter |
Sure. We have released 3 versions of an API for which there are no customers yet for edgezones. We discovered we need to add new enum value to support a Storage Account type which will be the default value for all edgezones. We want to maintain consistency and for the sake of completeness, we want to add it to released versions. Here is the breaking change workitem: breaking change request for more details. If this is not correct way then please let us know how to proceed with this. |
|
Adding a new enum value must be done in a new api-version. The reason is because we can't have multiple versions of a single API contract (api-version). This is confusing for customers and Azure Customer Support Services (CSS). Also, we have to re-generate all new docs, SDKs, and tools (PowerShell/CLI) for the already-shipped api-version and this is even more confusion for customers. |
Jeffery, the service already supports the new enum value for the past 3 versions and there are no customers as of now. We need to add this change to swagger to reflect documentation for the enum value. |
JeffreyRichter
added
the
Approved-BreakingChange
ArcturusZhang
approved these changes
Feb 2, 2023
ArcturusZhang
added
the
Approved-SdkBreakingChange-Go
ArcturusZhang
approved these changes
Feb 2, 2023
|
model validation issues are not introduced by this PR and are being resolved in a separate PR |
This was referenced Feb 2, 2023
11 tasks
11 tasks
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.
ARM API Information (Control Plane)
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
Azure 1st Party Service can try out the Shift Left experience to initiate API design review from ADO code repo. If you are interested, may request engineering support by filling in with the form https://aka.ms/ShiftLeftSupportForm.
Changelog
Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:
NA, this is not a new feature and does not affect any existing customers.
January 2023
Contribution checklist (MS Employees Only):
If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.
ARM API Review Checklist
Otherwise your PR may be subject to ARM review requirements. Complete the following:
Check this box if any of the following apply to the PR so that the label "ARMReview" and "WaitForARMFeedback" will be added by bot to kick off ARM API Review. Missing to check this box in the following scenario may result in delays to the ARM manifest review and deployment.
-[ ] To review changes efficiently, ensure you copy the existing version into the new directory structure for first commit and then push new changes, including version updates, in separate commits. You can use OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. For more details refer to the wiki.
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 you have any breaking changes as defined in the Breaking Change Policy, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board.
Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Additional details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking Change Wiki.
NOTE: To update API(s) in public preview for over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)
Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.