-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.1k
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
[Hub Generated] Public private branch 'dev-security-Microsoft.Security-2021-12-01-preview' #18267
[Hub Generated] Public private branch 'dev-security-Microsoft.Security-2021-12-01-preview' #18267
Conversation
…7-01-preview to version 2021-12-01-preview
GitHub configuration
…s, updated discriminators
…ty-2021-12-01-preview
…updated aws to awsAccount on examples for aws env data
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
Hi, @SapirElmakayes your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board([email protected]). |
}, | ||
"policyAgentAutoProvisioningFlag": { | ||
"type": "boolean", | ||
"description": "Is Policy Kubernetes agent auto provisioning enabled" |
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.
consider using an enum instaead as explained here :
https://armwiki.azurewebsites.net/rp_onboarding/process/api_review_best_practices.html
Replace boolean/switch properties with better enum
A Boolean will forever have two valid values (true or false). A string enum type is always preferred. Also, properties should always provide better values just than True and False. For example two switches "isTypeA" and "isTypeB" should be replaced with one enum "type": [A, B, DefaultType]. Even if you still believe [True, False] are the correct values for a property, you should use a string enum with values [True, False] instead of boolean. Enums are always a more flexible and future proof option because they allow additional values to be added in the future in a non-breaking way, e.g. [True, False, Unknown].
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.
In case of a flag, changing it to enum would not make our life easier here IMO, because even in the case we'll need to add additional values in the future (where enum comes handy), we'll still have to change the property name (having a non-flag property with a "Flag" suffix contradicts its meaning), in any case, this would be a breaking change.
…y-2021-12-01-preview' (Azure#18267) * Adds base for updating Microsoft.Security from version preview/2021-07-01-preview to version 2021-12-01-preview * Updates readme * Updates API version in new specs and examples * Keep only Securityconnectors in the API version * Adding CspmMonitorGcp offering * minors * Adding Security connector * Fix prettier issue * Adding information protection offering * Adding suppression rule * added github configuration, fixed bugs * updated examples * added example * fixed bugs in offering inheritnece, added org data for aws/gcp objects, updated discriminators * added discriminator for orgmembershipType on environmentData object, updated aws to awsAccount on examples for aws env data * fixed discriminator position * all example validations + schema validations pass, BEFORE adding updated examples * fixed null aws env data property * Adding DefenderForDatabases * Run prettier * Small renamings * Fix native cloud conection * update servers offerings * adding containers * Remove DefenderForDatabases offerings * Adding Qualys as known word * Update the VA type to enum * small changes for servers offering and gcpproject properties * added missing enum types * Servers P1P2 * Add P1P2 to servers GCP * subPlan fixes * Remove supression * add suppression rule back * Adding operations to the default tag * Add x-ms-identifiers Co-authored-by: Sapir Elmakayes <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: chemishumacher <[email protected]>
…y-2021-12-01-preview' (Azure#18267) * Adds base for updating Microsoft.Security from version preview/2021-07-01-preview to version 2021-12-01-preview * Updates readme * Updates API version in new specs and examples * Keep only Securityconnectors in the API version * Adding CspmMonitorGcp offering * minors * Adding Security connector * Fix prettier issue * Adding information protection offering * Adding suppression rule * added github configuration, fixed bugs * updated examples * added example * fixed bugs in offering inheritnece, added org data for aws/gcp objects, updated discriminators * added discriminator for orgmembershipType on environmentData object, updated aws to awsAccount on examples for aws env data * fixed discriminator position * all example validations + schema validations pass, BEFORE adding updated examples * fixed null aws env data property * Adding DefenderForDatabases * Run prettier * Small renamings * Fix native cloud conection * update servers offerings * adding containers * Remove DefenderForDatabases offerings * Adding Qualys as known word * Update the VA type to enum * small changes for servers offering and gcpproject properties * added missing enum types * Servers P1P2 * Add P1P2 to servers GCP * subPlan fixes * Remove supression * add suppression rule back * Adding operations to the default tag * Add x-ms-identifiers Co-authored-by: Sapir Elmakayes <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: chemishumacher <[email protected]>
This is a PR generated at OpenAPI Hub. You can view your work branch via this link.
Changelog
Add a changelog entry for 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
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 are using OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. 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 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.