-
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
Anf 7859 2020 06 01 api bugfix snapshot policy list volume #11220
Anf 7859 2020 06 01 api bugfix snapshot policy list volume #11220
Conversation
…into ANF-7859-2020-06-01-API-Bugfix-SnapshotPolicy-ListVolume
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Hi, @audunn 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. vsswagger@microsoft.com |
azure-sdk-for-net
|
Azure CLI Extension Generation
No readme.md specification configuration files were found that are associated with the files modified in this pull request, or swagger_to_sdk section in readme.md is not configured
|
azure-sdk-for-python
|
azure-sdk-for-js
|
azure-resource-manager-schemas
|
azure-sdk-for-java
|
azure-sdk-for-go
|
azure-sdk-for-python-track2
No readme.md specification configuration files were found that are associated with the files modified in this pull request, or swagger_to_sdk section in readme.md is not configured
|
Trenton Generation
|
Hi @audunn, one or multiple breaking change(s) is detected in your PR. Pls follow breaking change policy to request breaking change review and approval before proceeding swagger PR review. |
@lirenhe will do, I am waiting to be granted access to that document |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Note changes to 2019-10-01, 2019-11-01, 2020-02-01, 2020-03-01 and 2020-05-01 are non functional and are to address a issue in a description that can cause confusing with customers/users and should be corrected |
@lirenhe Still waiting to be granted access to that document for the breaking change policy. Is there anything that can be done to speed up the process. |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Removed validation limits on conditional number value that cause issues in generated SDK code. |
@lirenhe Note the service is in preview status |
} | ||
} | ||
"description": "List of volumes", | ||
"type": "array", |
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.
This is a significant breaking change to what existed before and doesn't meet the RPC defined collection response. It should be { "value": [{yourObject1}, {yourObject2}] }.
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.
Yes, this was to match the actual response from the service as SDK's where having deserialization issues.
Probably we would need to update the service to produce { "value": [{yourObject1}, {yourObject2}] } type response. Is this a hard requirement and something that what we should do here?
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.
updated spec
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.
The collection response is a standard contract that everyone should follow for collection GETs.
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
@lirenhe this is approved by ARM review can we revisit this breaking change issue? I don't believe this is breaking change as this fixes recently added functionality that is broken for SDK users due to issues in generated SDK code and has never worked as expected and should be fixed. |
Due to service side changes needed for this issue, this will resolved in a later API version. |
Swagger pipeline restarted successfully, please wait for status update in this comment. |
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
This is and urgent fix that addresses a bug that was discovered in generated SDK's. The generated code is unable to reserialize snapshot policy list volume response (the spec did not match the response) and needs to be addressed in 2020-06-01 and 2020-07-01.
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 API Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.
Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.