Archiving Old Samples #664
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for archiving these items. We'll ignore them when evaluating our Microsoft Entra ID branding requirements.
When you get to doing update passes, can you please prioritize e2e_samples/parking_sensors for both Microsoft Entra ID updates and freshness updates, as this is the only sample currently linked to from the Azure Architecture Center.
|
Hi @ckittel , I have pushed the "Microsoft Entra ID branding" changes as well in this PR. And it includes both live and archived samples. Can I please request you to take a closer look and highlight any discrepancies? Regarding the freshness, we are currently testing the sample but given the complexity, it is going to take some time. And it would be a separate PR. CC: @devlace |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
THANK YOU for making the changes and archiving all that content. parking_sensors was the item on our list, and this I consider resolved. I have one suggestion below, but it's not a blocker for merging. Maybe stuff like this can be addressed in a future pass when you are doing freshness updates.
| @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ databricks_host=https://$(echo "$arm_output" | jq -r '.properties.outputs.databr | |||
| databricks_workspace_resource_id=$(echo "$arm_output" | jq -r '.properties.outputs.databricks_id.value') | |||
| databricks_aad_token=$(az account get-access-token --resource 2ff814a6-3304-4ab8-85cb-cd0e6f879c1d --output json | jq -r .accessToken) # Databricks app global id | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In a future PR, please adjust even things like this. databricks_aad_token -> databricks_access_token
I won't block the PR from merging over things like this, but would be good to finish getting cleaned up.
Type of PR
Purpose
Does this introduce a breaking change? If yes, details on what can break
No, the changes are mostly textual so shouldn't break any active sample.
Author pre-publish checklist
Validation steps
Issues Closed or Referenced