Initial public commit for enrichment APIs #13479
Conversation
|
Hi, @TimLPaterson 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. [email protected] |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.SecurityInsights/preview/2019-01-01-preview/SecurityInsights.json#L1852:5 |
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.SecurityInsights/preview/2019-01-01-preview/SecurityInsights.json#L1894:5 |
️⚠️LintDiff: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
- Linted configuring files (Based on source branch, openapi-validator v1.9.2 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.6 )
- Linted configuring files (Based on target branch, openapi-validator v1.9.2 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.6 )
Only 10 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
️️✔️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 BreakingChange (Base on preview version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️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 succeeded [Detail]
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"securityinsights/resource-manager/readme.md",
"tag":"package-2019-01-preview",
"details":"> Installing AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0)"|
|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"securityinsights/resource-manager/readme.md",
"tag":"package-2019-01-preview",
"details":"> Installed AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0->1.8.0)"|
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
"readme":"securityinsights/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2019-01-preview", "details":"Error: Semantic validation failed. There was some errors" |
| 💬 AutorestCore/Exception | "readme":"securityinsights/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2019-01-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.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
|
@jianyexi Breaking change throws exception |
|
@TimLPaterson The breaking change tool raised an exception due to a bug, but adding new APIs is breaking change and is required a new API version. |
|
NewApiVersionRequired reason: |
Hi, @jianyexi I already got an approved exception for this (please see the PR referenced above). The problem I had was that I couldn't convert my PR in the private repo into a PR in the public repo (I had permissions problems, and a 500-level error when I tried). I contacted the OpenAPI support staff and Zhenglai Zhang suggested I make a brand new PR and just reference the old one. |
|
Hi, @TimLPaterson your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board([email protected]). cc @PhoenixHe-msft |
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
| @@ -1652,6 +1652,90 @@ | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
| }, | |||
| "/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.SecurityInsights/enrichment/ip/geodata/": { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ip/geodata [](start = 120, length = 10)
ip address in query string instead of /ip/xxx/geodata? This path looks weird.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @allenjzhang I actually had ip as a path parameter originally but changed it at the suggestion of the original ARM reviewers (this was in an email conversation not captured in my private repo PR). My original PR has already received ARM approval and an exception for the API version. (link at the top of this PR)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@allenjzhang Can you resolve this and approve/complete the PR?
| @@ -1652,6 +1652,90 @@ | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
| }, | |||
| "/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.SecurityInsights/enrichment/ip/geodata/": { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is being added back to 2019-01-01-preview? As readme.md default tag is referring to 2020 stable, the SDK automation generated no diff. You should really create a new API versions for it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is because this PR is actually a copy of one made a while back (which received ARM approval and approval for the breaking change). The reason I had to make this fresh PR was that I couldn't convert my PR in the private repo into a PR in the public repo (I had permissions problems, and a 500-level error when I tried). I contacted the OpenAPI support staff and Zhenglai Zhang suggested I make a brand new PR and just reference the old one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@allenjzhang (as above) Can you resolve this and approve/complete the PR?
...resource-manager/Microsoft.SecurityInsights/preview/2019-01-01-preview/SecurityInsights.json
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...resource-manager/Microsoft.SecurityInsights/preview/2019-01-01-preview/SecurityInsights.json
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...resource-manager/Microsoft.SecurityInsights/preview/2019-01-01-preview/SecurityInsights.json
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
Hi @TimLPaterson, one or multiple breaking change(s) is detected in your PR. Please check out the breaking change(s), and provide business justification in the PR comment and @ PR assignee why you must have these change(s), and how external customer impact can be mitigated. Please ensure to follow breaking change policy to request breaking change review and approval before proceeding swagger PR review. |
|
@TimLPaterson Adding new path to old preview version is breaking change. Please go through breaking change review process. |
Hi @PhoenixHe-msft I have already received an approval for the breaking change. I was not able to convert the private repo PR directly into a PR against the public repo, so on the advice of the OpenAPI team I made a new one and included a reference to it. We are in private preview right now, so I'm not quite ready to merge this PR. The additional fields are a result of private preview feedback (which is why I made a new commit yesterday) |
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-BreakingChange-Go
labels
|
Hi @TimLPaterson, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
TimLPaterson
force-pushed
the
enrichmentAPIInitialPublic
branch
from
5d2b540
to
5947be9
Compare
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
CI-BreakingChange-Go
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
PhoenixHe-NV
added
DoNotMerge
* Initial public commit for enrichment APIs * Prettier * Add two new fields * Prettier * Remove two fields, fix several descriptions * Remove unneeded format line * Remove incorrect references to operational insights and workspacename Co-authored-by: Tim Paterson <=>
This is a copy of this PR into the private repo: https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/pull/3079 The changes are identical, except that I have squashed them to a single commit.
It contains a breaking change, but it has been approved. We have private preview starting next week, and public preview scheduled in a month or so, and GA a month or so after that. Could someone advise me about the best time to actually complete this PR given that timeline?
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
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.