Review request for Microsoft.ContainerService to add version 2022-05-02-preview #19262
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
…w/2022-04-02-preview to version 2022-05-02-preview
Co-authored-by: weizhichen <weizhichen@microsoft.com>
* currentOrchestratorVersion is read-only property * Only apply change to 2022-05-02-preview
….azureKeyVaultKms to support key vault with private link (#19086) * Add keyVaultNetworkAccess and keyVaultResourceId into securityProfile.azureKeyVaultKms to support key vault with private link * fix
* 2022-05-02-preview defender updates * update example * Typo * Update sample * typo * another typo
|
Hi, @FumingZhang 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. vscswagger@microsoft.com |
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
ARMReview
WaitForARMFeedback
|
Hi, @FumingZhang your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board(armapireview@microsoft.com). |
|
/azp run |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| The child tracked resource, 'trustedAccessRoleBindings' with immediate parent 'ManagedCluster', must have a list by immediate parent operation. Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L6638 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enableCustomCATrust Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L3294 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enableNamespaceResources Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L4246 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enableVnetIntegration Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L4502 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enabled Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L4947 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enabled Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L6041 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enabled Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L6073 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enabled Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L6115 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enabled Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L6129 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enabled Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L6173 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enableRbac Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L6329 |
|
| Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enabled Location: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L6687 |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
️❌Avocado: 1 Errors, 1 Warnings failed [Detail]
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The default tag does not contain all APIs in this RP. Please make sure the missing API swaggers are in the default tag. readme: specification/containerservice/resource-manager/readme.md json: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2019-10-27-preview/openShiftManagedClusters.json |
| The default tag contains multiple API versions swaggers. readme: specification/applicationinsights/resource-manager/readme.md tag: specification/applicationinsights/resource-manager/readme.md#tag-package-2022-04-01 |
️️✔️ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️❌Cross-Version Breaking Changes: 2 Errors, 4 Warnings failed [Detail]
- Compared Swaggers (Based on Oad v0.9.5)
- current:preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json compared with base:stable/2022-04-01/managedClusters.json
- current:preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json compared with base:preview/2022-04-02-preview/managedClusters.json
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The new version is missing a definition that was found in the old version. Was 'ManagedClusterSecurityProfileAzureDefender' removed or renamed? New: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L2800:3 Old: Microsoft.ContainerService/stable/2022-04-01/managedClusters.json#L2221:3 |
|
The new version is missing a property found in the old version. Was 'azureDefender' renamed or removed? New: Microsoft.ContainerService/preview/2022-05-02-preview/managedClusters.json#L6008:7 Old: Microsoft.ContainerService/stable/2022-04-01/managedClusters.json#L5426:7 |
The following breaking changes are detected by comparison with latest preview version:
️⌛CredScan pending [Detail]
️⌛PoliCheck pending [Detail]
️️✔️SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
️️✔️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
|
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
Hi @FumingZhang, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
This was referenced May 30, 2022
|
Dear review board, I would like to clarify the failures in the CI checks. For SDK azure-powershell, it happened in our previous PR 04-02-preview/04-01. This used to be optional and is enabled recently. Confirmed with owner @dolauli, this would not work for some modules and could be ignored. For SDK azure-sdk-for-go, this also happened in our previous PR 04-02-preview/04-01 and is caused by another PR #18789. cc Golang SDK owner @ArcturusZhang. For SDK azure-sdk-for-net, it happened in our previous PR 04-02-preview/04-01. I suppose this should be a known issue. According to the error log, the reason for the error is the permission problem when the pipeline is executed, which has nothing to do with this PR. For Swagger Avocado, it happened in our previous PR 04-02-preview. The 2019-10-27-preview/openShiftManagedClusters.json mentioned in the error log is a deprecated swagger file, Currently, only managedCluster is supported by us, the rest such as containerService, openShiftManagedClusters, location, etc. are all deprecated. These errors started appearing after this update of Avocado. Would really appreciate if some mechanism could be provided to disable the alarms, cc owner @ruowan. For Cross-Version Breaking Changes and Swagger SDK Breaking Change Tracking, it's caused by rebranding of Microsoft Defender. Feature owner @orparnes has got the approval from Breaking Change Review Board. |
|
Hi @FumingZhang, one or multiple breaking change(s) is detected in your PR. Please check out the breaking change(s), and provide business justification in the PR comment and @ PR assignee why you must have these change(s), and how external customer impact can be mitigated. Please ensure to follow breaking change policy to request breaking change review and approval before proceeding swagger PR review. |
|
@FumingZhang - I added the breaking change review label due to breaking changes I discovered during review. ARM review will resume after the breaking change label is addressed. Please ping the current APR review oncall after that's been done. |
Thanks for pointing this out. As early as 2022-03-02-preview API version, we added this field, but the readonly attribute was not set at that time. Then in the latest stable API version 2022-04-01, this field was added with an additional readonly attribute, but feature owner forgot to update and add the readonly attribute in its corresponding preview API version 2022-04-02-preview. So we plan to align it with the stable API through this new preview API. |
Thanks for pointing this out. I understand the recommendation is helpful to avoid confusion for most circumstances, but actually the abbreviation |
Thanks for pointing this out. I've read the docs and agree that in some circumstances enum is better than boolean since enum is the superset of boolean. However here we use this field to act like a switch to enable/disable the |
|
mentat9
added
ARMChangesRequested
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
|
Thanks for the additional context re: breaking change review. |
mentat9
added
the
ARMSignedOff
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
ARMChangesRequested
honghr
approved these changes
Jun 2, 2022
This was referenced Jun 2, 2022
25 tasks
25 tasks
FumingZhang
deleted the
dev-containerservice-Microsoft.ContainerService-2022-05-02-preview
branch
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:
Already deployed to all global regions by 2022-05-29. Plan to complete the deployment to sov clouds by 2022-06-03.
2022-06-01.
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 appy to the PR so that the label "ARMReview" and "WaitForARMFeedback" will be added by bot to kick off ARM API Review. Missing to check this box in the following scenario may result in delays to the ARM manifest review and deployment.
-[ ] 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.