2021-04-01-preview to add private link support #14258
Merged
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
|
Hi, @walrusmcd 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 |
|
[Call for Action] To better understand Azure service dev/test scenario, and support Azure service developer better on Swagger and REST API related tests in early phase, please help to fill in with this survey https://aka.ms/SurveyForEarlyPhase. It will take 5 to 10 minutes. If you already complete survey, please neglect this comment. Thanks. |
Swagger Validation ReportPosted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors? |
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
|
Hi, @walrusmcd your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board(armapireview@microsoft.com). cc @ |
|
Hi @walrusmcd, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
This was referenced May 5, 2021
|
Note: the linting failure is on systemData not being present. these are for the 4 new endpoints that return privatelink objects. Since I'm returning the built in types, how do we proceed? these built in types (v1 and v2) don't support systemData today. Here are the v2 types for private link. None of those objects have systemData in them. and I cannot modify those core system types. |
Good practice to add x-ms-error-response on all your error responses (at least all the new ones in this PR). Refers to: specification/desktopvirtualization/resource-manager/Microsoft.DesktopVirtualization/preview/2021-04-01-preview/desktopvirtualization.json:2481 in f7b967d. [](commit_id = f7b967d, deletion_comment = False) |
Successful PUT response code should be 201. 200 is also OK when PUT did nothing. In reply to: 833255246 In reply to: 833255246 In reply to: 833255246 Refers to: specification/desktopvirtualization/resource-manager/Microsoft.DesktopVirtualization/preview/2021-04-01-preview/desktopvirtualization.json:2615 in d63f2a3. [](commit_id = d63f2a3, deletion_comment = False) |
Note that system data doesn't go in the property bag. Would something like this work? Then reference in response: |
|
@mentat9 thanks for the review ! on the put responses. i thought put had a couple of responses: 201 (if created) and 200 or 204 (if an existing resource was updated) . (rfc here) . this is a funny verb since private link mandates this to be a PUT. and also mandates that it cannot be done to create the object. they have another flow for creating the objects . this PUT here is only valid for updates. in that case, do you recommend 200 or 204? i had been using 200's in the case of an update to an existing object. |
|
@mentat9 you know what would be awesome. if systemData is desired for all arm object responses, could v2 of types for /defintions/Resource include it ? then all objects would get it. I'm going to try that idea you have there to see if i can somehow "add" system data to a core shared type that doesn't have it. |
ARM normally requires create to be done by PUT with a 201 status code response. 200 is allowed when PUT updates an existing resource. 204 is only used when DELETE is attempted for a non-existent resource or for PATCH if the resource is not returned in the payload. In this case, I think you are correct that 200 is the only valid response for this particular PUT, because it created outside of your RP. |
existing privatelink types
|
@erich-wang can you pls take a look. This pr is priority! |
|
@datr93, could you please fix LintDiff error first? |
|
@erich-wang i have the final lint errors fixed. It took some massaging to make systemData work in the (pre)existing shared types. Private Link v2 shared types didn't expose sharedData , so I worked through some hoops to help it expose shared data. All ready for sign off. thank you ! |
|
hi @erich-wang , just checking on this one. is there any new feedback? or can we progress to the next stage towards merging. thanks !! |
erich-wang
approved these changes
May 13, 2021
This was referenced May 13, 2021
mkarmark
pushed a commit
to mkarmark/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2021
* copy of 2021-03-09-preview * bump version to 2021-04-01-preview * adding new changes for 2021-04-01-preview * added x-ms-error-response * see if systemData will work for private link * Case was wrong for systemData * more of adding systemData to existing privatelink types * - final set of systemData fixes
11 tasks
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
Please ensure to add changelog with this PR by answering the following questions.
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 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.