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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

check whether pr merged #21752

Merged
merged 208 commits into from
Nov 16, 2021
Merged

check whether pr merged #21752

merged 208 commits into from
Nov 16, 2021

Conversation

RAY-316
Copy link
Contributor

@RAY-316 RAY-316 commented Nov 15, 2021

No description provided.

RAY-316 and others added 30 commits August 23, 2021 16:04
@RAY-316
release_iseus_status_auto_reply
2c563ff
@RAY-316
issue_aoto_close_revert
9603d0f
@RAY-316
Update main.py
133a6a0
@RAY-316
Update main.py
d37ca66
@RAY-316
Update update_issue_body.py
f5a24c8
@BigCat20196
Update reply_generator.py
590dc3d
@BigCat20196
Update reply_generator.py
0a20a20
@BigCat20196
Update update_issue_body.py
1644cf1
@BigCat20196
Update main.py
6b1f482
@BigCat20196
Update update_issue_body.py
fafae8e
@BigCat20196
Update update_issue_body.py
fba944d
@BigCat20196
Update main.py
256fb62
@RAY-316
Update reply_generator.py
ff27a87
@RAY-316
Update main.py
9bbde53
@BigCat20196
Update update_issue_body.py
c065cf7
@BigCat20196
Update main.py
80007ac
@msyyc
Update scripts/release_issue_status/update_issue_body.py
bef41b1
@BigCat20196
Update update_issue_body.py
2682c0e
@BigCat20196
Update main.py
af36ccc
@BigCat20196
Update reply_generator.py
9223146
@BigCat20196
Update update_issue_body.py
8ee91fe
@BigCat20196
Update main.py
bef133c
@msyyc
Update scripts/release_issue_status/main.py
9dfd084
@msyyc
Update main.py
51f92fd
@msyyc
Update scripts/release_issue_status/main.py
5259157
@msyyc
Update scripts/release_issue_status/main.py
6949bfb
@msyyc
Update scripts/release_issue_status/main.py
7b14fd2
@msyyc
Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-python …
299cfae 
…into HEAD
@msyyc
Update scripts/release_issue_status/update_issue_body.py
7d3fab8
@BigCat20196
Update scripts/release_issue_status/main.py
f07b5b2
@check-enforcer
Copy link

This pull request is protected by Check Enforcer.

What is Check Enforcer?

Check Enforcer helps ensure all pull requests are covered by at least one check-run (typically an Azure Pipeline). When all check-runs associated with this pull request pass then Check Enforcer itself will pass.

Why am I getting this message?

You are getting this message because Check Enforcer did not detect any check-runs being associated with this pull request within five minutes. This may indicate that your pull request is not covered by any pipelines and so Check Enforcer is correctly blocking the pull request being merged.

What should I do now?

If the check-enforcer check-run is not passing and all other check-runs associated with this PR are passing (excluding license-cla) then you could try telling Check Enforcer to evaluate your pull request again. You can do this by adding a comment to this pull request as follows:
/check-enforcer evaluate
Typically evaulation only takes a few seconds. If you know that your pull request is not covered by a pipeline and this is expected you can override Check Enforcer using the following command:
/check-enforcer override
Note that using the override command triggers alerts so that follow-up investigations can occur (PRs still need to be approved as normal).

What if I am onboarding a new service?

Often, new services do not have validation pipelines associated with them, in order to bootstrap pipelines for a new service, you can issue the following command as a pull request comment:
/azp run prepare-pipelines
This will run a pipeline that analyzes the source tree and creates the pipelines necessary to build and validate your pull request. Once the pipeline has been created you can trigger the pipeline using the following comment:
/azp run python - [service] - ci

@msyyc
Copy link
Member

msyyc commented Nov 16, 2021

/check-enforcer override

@msyyc msyyc merged commit a2f7db3 into Azure:main Nov 16, 2021
azure-sdk pushed a commit to azure-sdk/azure-sdk-for-python that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2022
@richardwhiuk @msyyc
CodeGen from PR 21752 in Azure/azure-rest-api-specs
cd0011c 
[Hub Generated] Publish private branch 'ssivathas/Microsoft.MobileNetwork-2022-11-01' (Azure#21752)

* add or modify files

* Use "5Qi" as the schema to define Default QoS Flow 5G QoS Indicator value. (Azure#9817)

On SIM policy we use the 'Default QoS Flow 5G QoS Indicator value', we were incorrectly using the '5QiPriorityLevel' schema (which is an interger between 1 and 127 as per https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/blob/RPSaaSMaster/specification/mobilenetwork/resource-manager/Microsoft.MobileNetwork/stable/2022-11-01/ts29571.json#L117. We should have used 5Qi - an integer between 0 and 255. We made a mistake when we first p ut this in and have no spotted it.

Even though changing the allowed values for a property is a breaking change, we think this is acceptable because:
1) This is our first stable API, there is no pre-existing stable API we need to be back-compatible with
2) 2022-04-01-preview to 2022-11-01 already contains breaking changes that we have discussed in https://eng.ms/docs/strategic-missions-and-technologies/strategic-missions-and-technologies-organization/azure-for-operators/packet-core/private-mobile-network/azure-private-5g-core/cross-team/releases/2022-11-01-arm-api/back-compatibility
3) We have one customer who may need to use values 128-255 -> if that customer does PUTs with the 2022-11-01 API then a GET with the 2022-04-01, it will fail, while this is sad, we think this is an acceptable risk.

* Update ICCID definition to support shorter ICCID (Azure#9910)

GSM 11.1 Version 8 has been replaced by 3GPP TS 11.11, which itself has been replaced by 3GPP TS 102.211 Rel 16, and all of them share the same information for the definition of ICCID.

ISO/IEC 7812-1 2017, ITU-T E.118 - 05/2006 and 3GPP TS 102.211 all alllow ICCID/Primary Account Numbers which are shorter than 19 digits.

While ISO/IEC 7812-1 2017 and ITU-T E.118 - 05/2006 both require a maximum number of digits of 19, and GSM 11.11 is clear than 20 digits ICCID are allowed to be grandfathered in.

ITU-T E.118 - 05/2006 mandates that all new SIM cards use a prefix of 89, but allows 66 as a transitional mechanism for older SIM cards.

ISO/IEC 7812-1 2017 mandates a minimum length of 10 digits. No other specification comments on a minimum size, so we go with this.

The original validation was based on an incorrect reading of the specs, where 19 and 20 were assumed to be the only valid lengths, and the comment on the transitional mechanism was missed.

Even though changing the allowed values for a property is a breaking change, we think this is acceptable because:

1) This is our first stable API, there is no pre-existing stable API we need to be back-compatible with

2) 2022-04-01-preview to 2022-11-01 already contains breaking changes that we have discussed in https://eng.ms/docs/strategic-missions-and-technologies/strategic-missions-and-technologies-organization/azure-for-operators/packet-core/private-mobile-network/azure-private-5g-core/cross-team/releases/2022-11-01-arm-api/back-compatibility

3) We have customers who are currently blocked and having to work around this restriction, and it's acceptable for them to be unable to resubmit the data on the old API.

4) This is relaxing the restriction on a optional field, so the impact of this change is restricted anyway.

5) Not making this change leaves the product ill defined for ever.

* Remove reference to 2021-04-01-preview API in readme

* Fix python output-folder

* Update readme.python.md

Co-authored-by: Richard Whitehouse <github@richardwhiuk.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Lee <andrewlee@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Yuchao Yan <yuchaoyan@microsoft.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@msyyc msyyc msyyc approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@RAY-316 @msyyc @BigCat20196