Skip to content
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

Issue 616 - updated documentation #617

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 21, 2020
Merged

Issue 616 - updated documentation #617

merged 3 commits into from
Apr 21, 2020

Conversation

mwpreston
Copy link
Contributor

@mwpreston mwpreston commented Apr 21, 2020

Description

This PR contains updates to some of the markdown documentation files

Related Issue

Resolves #616

Motivation and Context

Provides more up to date documentation.

How Has This Been Tested?

  • Please describe in detail how you tested your changes.
  • Include details of your testing environment, and the tests you ran to see how your change affects other areas of the code, etc.

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an x in all the boxes that apply:

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

Go over all the following points, and put an x in all the boxes that apply. If you're unsure about any of these, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help!

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTION document.
  • I have updated the CHANGELOG file accordingly for the version that this merge modifies.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

Copy link
Contributor

@rfitzhugh rfitzhugh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One comment, otherwise LGTM :shipit:


## Why is the returned data different when I filter objects based on name vs based on their id value?

Many Rubrik API endpoints are designed in such a way that they provide lists of objects as a response when querying a simple object type, and a more detailed response when sending the actual ID of the object. For instance, we are able to get a list of VMs by sending a GET request to the `/vmware/vm` endpoint. We can, if we desire, shorten this list by adding a `name` filter into the query. This process is the same as running `Get-RubrikVM -Name "VMName"`. By sending the id to the endpoint `/vmware/vm/{id}` we essentially ask for a more detailed response, equivalent to running `Get-RubrikVM -ID "12345"`. That said, we are able to use the `-Name` parameter along with the `-DetailedObject` parameter to retrieve the detailed response just as if we had passed the `-Id` parameter.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Recommend consistent usage of the id parameter. Sometimes you are saying id or Id or ID, which do we want to standardize on?

@mwpreston mwpreston merged commit f0dd6b2 into devel Apr 21, 2020
@jaapbrasser jaapbrasser deleted the updateddocs branch April 22, 2020 21:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Gitbooks documentation could use a refresh
2 participants