Azure Event Grid: Add support for 2021-06-01-preview swagger #14783
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
|
Hi, @ahamad-MS 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 |
|
[Call for Action] To better understand Azure service dev/test scenario, and support Azure service developer better on Swagger and REST API related tests in early phase, please help to fill in with this survey https://aka.ms/SurveyForEarlyPhase. It will take 5 to 10 minutes. If you already complete survey, please neglect this comment. Thanks. |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: disableLocalAuth Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L5554 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: autoCreateTopicWithFirstSubscription Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L5559 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: autoDeleteTopicWithLastSubscription Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L5564 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: disableLocalAuth Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L5971 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: autoCreateTopicWithFirstSubscription Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L5975 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: autoDeleteTopicWithLastSubscription Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L5979 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: isDataAction Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L7394 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: disableLocalAuth Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L7484 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: disableLocalAuth Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L7554 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: disableLocalAuth Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L8178 |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Only 10 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The response of operation:'PrivateEndpointConnections_Get' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L4009 |
|
The response of operation:'ExtensionTopics_Get' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L5309 |
|
The response of operation:'TopicTypes_Get' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L5389 |
|
The response of operation:'PrivateEndpointConnections_Update' is defined without 'systemData'. Consider adding the systemData to the response. Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L4078 |
|
The delete operation is defined without a 200 or 204 error response implementation,please add it.' Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L4217 |
|
The delete operation is defined without a 200 or 204 error response implementation,please add it.' Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L4935 |
| Since operation 'EventSubscriptions_GetDeliveryAttributes' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L2648 |
|
| Since operation 'SystemTopicEventSubscriptions_GetDeliveryAttributes' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L2698 |
|
| Since operation 'PartnerTopicEventSubscriptions_GetDeliveryAttributes' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L2757 |
|
| 'PUT' operation 'PrivateEndpointConnections_Update' should use method name 'Create'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.EventGrid/preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json#L4084 |
️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️❌Cross-Version Breaking Changes: 9 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
- Compared Swaggers (Based on Oad v0.8.11)
- current:preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json compared with base:preview/2020-10-15-preview/EventGrid.json
- current:preview/2021-06-01-preview/EventGrid.json compared with base:stable/2020-06-01/EventGrid.json
The following breaking changes are detected by comparison with latest preview version:
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️️✔️[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"eventgrid/resource-manager/readme.md",
"tag":"package-2021-06-preview",
"details":"> Installing AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0)"|
|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"eventgrid/resource-manager/readme.md",
"tag":"package-2021-06-preview",
"details":"> Installed AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0->1.8.0)"|
|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"eventgrid/resource-manager/readme.md",
"tag":"package-2021-06-preview",
"details":"> Loading AutoRest extension '@autorest/modelerfour' (4.15.456->4.15.456)"|
️️✔️[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️[Staging] SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️[Staging] Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
This was referenced Jun 12, 2021
This was referenced Jun 12, 2021
|
For easy review, Per ARM guide in first comment: |
|
@akning-ms I added previous preview API version 2020-10-15-preview as a baseline for commit #2 and then reapply the new code in commit #1 Can you plz help with the Swagger Avocado failure? it is false positive due to applying the old api version files in commit #2.. I am not able to rerun this test and the missing file is already there now. Also, I am not able to understand the failure in python track 2 .. We did not change anything in swagger in topic (this is existing code/definition_ |
Kishp01
approved these changes
Jun 14, 2021
|
For avocado, guess you can fix it by removing preview/2021-06-01-preview/examples/PartnerRegistrations_List.json |
|
@msyyc to help on why track2 python sdk gen failure |
|
Hi, @ahamad-MS your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board(armapireview@microsoft.com). |
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
akning-ms
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
|
As ARM reviewed in private repo. so it is not need here |
|
@ahamad-MS There is breaking change in the new content compared with older swagger. Is it necessary? |
|
Hello @msyyc ... Thanks for looking into this .. Short answer : yes necessary.. Please note: that this swagger was already reviewed and approved by ARM team and available in private repro here: Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr#3437 Regarding:
|
This was referenced Jun 15, 2021
Closed
asager
pushed a commit
to asager/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 24, 2021
…4783) * Add support for 2021-06-01-preview swagger * Add 2021-10-15-preview as a baseline for this commit * Add 2021-06-06-01-preview support * fix example * Remove example as path/operation is not used * Update readme.python.md * fix python pipeline failure Co-authored-by: Ashraf Hamad <ahamad@ntdev.microsoft.com> Co-authored-by: msyyc <70930885+msyyc@users.noreply.github.com>
mkarmark
pushed a commit
to mkarmark/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2021
…4783) * Add support for 2021-06-01-preview swagger * Add 2021-10-15-preview as a baseline for this commit * Add 2021-06-06-01-preview support * fix example * Remove example as path/operation is not used * Update readme.python.md * fix python pipeline failure Co-authored-by: Ashraf Hamad <ahamad@ntdev.microsoft.com> Co-authored-by: msyyc <70930885+msyyc@users.noreply.github.com>
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.
Add support for 2021-06-01-preview swagger
NOTE. This swagger was already reviewed and approved by ARM team and available in private repro here: https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/pull/3437
Changelog
Please ensure to add changelog with this PR by answering the following questions.
Already in Central US Euap; Remaining regions ends Monday: 6/14/2021
ASAP, Moday 6/14/2021 as we are promising customer for feature availablility and tests blocked on availability of ARM Manifest in all regions (hence, the need for public swagger ASAP) in public repo.
NOTE. This swagger was already reviewed and approved by ARM team and available in private repro here: https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/pull/3437
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.
NOTE. This swagger was already reviewed and approved by ARM team and available in private repro here: https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/pull/3437
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.