[Hub Generated] Publish private branch 'datafactory/v-jinpan/FixTrack2' #24003
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
|
The PR is created based on the updates in the private branch. The updates in the PR has already been reviewed and approved with this PR Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/12572 |
Jingshu923
requested review from
Frey-Wang,
zhangyd2015 and
davidzhaoyue
as code owners
|
Hi, @Jingshu923 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 |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| compared swaggers (via Oad v0.10.4)] | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| Pipeline.json | 2018-06-01(02f1da4) | 2018-06-01(main) |
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The new version has a new optional property 'configurationType' that was not found in the old version. New: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L8338:7 Old: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L8337:7 |
|
The new version has a new optional property 'targetSparkConfiguration' that was not found in the old version. New: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L8338:7 Old: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L8337:7 |
|
The new version has a new optional property 'sparkConfig' that was not found in the old version. New: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L8338:7 Old: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L8337:7 |
️️✔️Breaking Change(Cross-Version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️⚠️LintDiff: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
| compared tags (via openapi-validator v2.1.1) | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| package-2018-06 | package-2018-06(02f1da4) | package-2018-06(main) |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L68 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L248 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L252 |
|
| Schema should have a description or title. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L3044 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L6264 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L6551 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L6571 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L6807 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L7034 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L7718 |
|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L7950 |
|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L8077 |
️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️⚠️~[Staging] ServiceAPIReadinessTest: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
API Test is not triggered due to precheck failure. Check pipeline log for details.
️️✔️SwaggerAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️CadlAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️TypeSpecAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️PoliCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passed for PoliCheck.
️️✔️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).
️️✔️CadlValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for CadlValidation.
️️✔️TypeSpec Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for TypeSpec Validation.
️️✔️PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Summary.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
ghost
added
the
Generated ApiView
|
|
NewApiVersionRequired reason: |
This was referenced May 16, 2023
@Jingshu923 ,please take a look for this |
|
@Jingshu923 , Do you want to make changes in the current apiversion or create a new apiversion for this change? |
|
@kazrael2119 I did not why we have to create a new apiversion, could you please explain this? For configurationType change it is pushed by others and it has been merge |
@Jingshu923 here |
|
@kazrael2119 If possible I want to discuss offline in teams, but I could not find you, can you ping me in teams (v-jinpan@microsoft.com)? |
|
Breakchange merged in #23903 |
offline confirm with @Jingshu923 , |
kazrael2119
added
Approved-BreakingChange
kazrael2119
approved these changes
May 17, 2023
kazrael2119
added
the
Approved-OkToMerge
tadelesh
deleted the
published/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/datafactory/v-jinpan/FixTrack2
branch
This was referenced May 17, 2023
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.
This is a PR generated at OpenAPI Hub. You can view your work branch via this link.
ARM API Information (Control Plane)
Changelog
Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:
Contribution checklist (MS Employees Only):
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 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 copy the existing version into the new directory structure for first commit and then push new changes, including version updates, in separate commits. You can use OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. For more details refer to the wiki. Note that this doesn't apply if you are trying to merge a PR that was previously in the private repository.
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 you have any breaking changes as defined in the Breaking Change Policy, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board.
Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Additional details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking Change Wiki.
NOTE: To update API(s) in public preview for over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)
Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.