-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.2k
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
[App Service] Update swagger spec for ANT80 #5111
[App Service] Update swagger spec for ANT80 #5111
Conversation
If you're a MSFT employee, click this link |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-goThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-jsThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-pythonThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-nodeThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-javaA PR has been created for you based on this PR content. Once this PR will be merged, content will be added to your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-rubyA PR has been created for you based on this PR content. Once this PR will be merged, content will be added to your service PR: |
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
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.
Looks like some spelling fixes are being reverted. Maybe they still need to be fixed in the source code
@@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ | |||
], | |||
"responses": { | |||
"200": { | |||
"description": "Successfully deleted certificate." | |||
"description": "Succesfully deleted certificate." |
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.
Succesfully -> Successfully
{ | ||
"name": "recommendationId", | ||
"in": "query", | ||
"description": "The GUID of the recommedation object if you query an expired one. You don't need to specify it to query an active entry.", |
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.
recommedation -> recommendation
"schema": { | ||
"$ref": "./CommonDefinitions.json#/definitions/Operation" | ||
} | ||
"description": "Succesfully deleted virtual network." |
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.
Succesfully -> Successfully
], | ||
"responses": { | ||
"200": { | ||
"description": "Succesfully deleted virtual network." |
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.
Succesfully -> Successfully
@@ -354,7 +354,7 @@ | |||
}, | |||
"expirationDate": { | |||
"format": "date-time", | |||
"description": "Certificate expiration date.", | |||
"description": "Certificate expriration date.", |
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.
expriration -> expiration
Oops, I tried not to copy those over, but it looks like a few got through. Yesterday I combed through the source code to clean up the typos that had been manually fixed in the swagger spec. |
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.
What's the reason for breaking changes in stable API versions? Usually, we don't allow to do this.
https://travis-ci.org/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/jobs/486714248
My previous commits removed the 2018-02-01 Certificates files but I have added them back and that seems to have fixed the breaking changes check. There is one expected breaking change. There is a property called adminSiteName that's being hidden in this update. Per @suwatch - Admin Site Name feature never released. We should exclude that from rest api documentation as we might get more questions / affects other features. |
@sergey-shandar Is there an ARM team member added to review this PR? This PR has gone dark for about a week now. |
@Nking92 because it's potential breaking changes, ARM should review it before I merge. @ravbhatnagar |
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:
ARM API Review Checklist
Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs.
Please follow the link to find more details on API review process.