Add Check zone peers to Subscription.json #17050
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
|
Hi, @tjegbejimba 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] |
|
[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 |
|---|---|
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Resources/stable/2015-11-01/subscriptions.json#L149:5 |
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Resources/stable/2016-06-01/subscriptions.json#L166:5 |
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Resources/stable/2018-06-01/subscriptions.json#L166:5 |
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Resources/stable/2019-06-01/subscriptions.json#L176:5 |
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Resources/stable/2019-11-01/subscriptions.json#L181:5 |
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Resources/stable/2020-01-01/subscriptions.json#L186:5 |
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Resources/stable/2021-01-01/subscriptions.json#L196:5 |
️🔄LintDiff inProgress [Detail]
️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️~[Staging] ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️Cross-Version Breaking Changes succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️️✔️SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
- resources/resource-manager/readme.md#package-subscriptions-2021-01
- resources/resource-manager/readme.md#package-subscriptions-2020-01
- resources/resource-manager/readme.md#package-subscriptions-2019-11
- resources/resource-manager/readme.md#package-subscriptions-2019-06
- resources/resource-manager/readme.md#package-subscriptions-2018-06
- resources/resource-manager/readme.md#package-subscriptions-2016-06
- resources/resource-manager/readme.md#package-subscriptions-2015-11
- resources/resource-manager/readme.md#profile-hybrid-2019-03-01
️️✔️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).
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
|
Hi @tjegbejimba, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
This was referenced Dec 11, 2021
|
NewApiVersionRequired reason: |
ghost
removed
the
raych1
reviewed
Jan 4, 2022
|
@tjegbejimba there are redundant definition for ErrorResponse - , suggest to use the one in common types |
@jianyexi As my code change does not include those error responses, could we make that fix next time? |
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
@msyyc , can you have a look at the python track2 failures? |
raych1
approved these changes
Jan 12, 2022
This was referenced Jan 12, 2022
mstrisoline
pushed a commit
to mstrisoline/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 1, 2022
* remove name validation from client side * remove name check from deploymentScripts swagger * remove name check from previous swagger versions * remove pattern from resourcegroupname parameter * add checkZonePeers to subscription.json * fix linter and prettier errors * fix spelling errors * fix spelling and descriptions * add descriptions * fix linter issues * fix error responses * fix syntax errors * add description * add reponse body * revert changes to package-lock * Update readme.python.md Co-authored-by: Yuchao Yan <[email protected]>
LeiWang3
pushed a commit
to LeiWang3/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 31, 2022
* remove name validation from client side * remove name check from deploymentScripts swagger * remove name check from previous swagger versions * remove pattern from resourcegroupname parameter * add checkZonePeers to subscription.json * fix linter and prettier errors * fix spelling errors * fix spelling and descriptions * add descriptions * fix linter issues * fix error responses * fix syntax errors * add description * add reponse body * revert changes to package-lock * Update readme.python.md Co-authored-by: Yuchao Yan <[email protected]>
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.
Changelog
Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:
Contribution checklist:
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 label "WaitForARMFeedback" will be added automatically to begin ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays to the manifest.
-[ ] 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.
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 any of the following scenarios apply to the PR, request approval from the 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.