dedicatedhsm: adding a missing sku name #15453
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, @tombuildsstuff 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 Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The schema 'display' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L414 |
|
The schema 'DedicatedHsmOperationListResult' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L436 |
|
The schema 'ApiEntityReference' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L448 |
|
The schema 'NetworkInterface' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L457 |
|
The schema 'NetworkProfile' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L471 |
|
The schema 'Sku' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L486 |
|
The schema 'DedicatedHsmProperties' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L501 |
|
The schema 'DedicatedHsm' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L567 |
|
The schema 'DedicatedHsmPatchParameters' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L587 |
|
The schema 'DedicatedHsmListResult' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L599 |
|
The schema 'ResourceListResult' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L615 |
|
The schema 'DedicatedHsmError' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L631 |
|
The schema 'Error' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L640 |
|
The schema 'Resource' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L660 |
| OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'DedicatedHsmModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'DedicatedHsm' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L78 |
|
| OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'DedicatedHsmModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'DedicatedHsm' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L143 |
|
| OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'DedicatedHsmModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'DedicatedHsm' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L203 |
|
| OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'DedicatedHsmModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'DedicatedHsm' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L255 |
|
| OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'DedicatedHsmModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'DedicatedHsm' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L305 |
|
| OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'DedicatedHsmModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'DedicatedHsm' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L358 |
|
| Property 'location' must have ''x-ms-mutability':['read', 'create']' extension defined. Resource Model: 'Resource' Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L400 |
|
| 'NetworkProfile' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L471 |
|
| 'Sku' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L486 |
|
| 'display' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L414 |
|
| The API version:2018-10-31-preview having been in a preview state over one year , please move it to GA or retire. Location: Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules/preview/2018-10-31-preview/dedicatedhsm.json#L6 |
️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️Cross-Version Breaking Changes succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️️✔️[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"hardwaresecuritymodules/resource-manager/readme.md",
"tag":"package-2018-10",
"details":"> Installing AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0)"|
|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"hardwaresecuritymodules/resource-manager/readme.md",
"tag":"package-2018-10",
"details":"> Installed AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0->1.8.0)"|
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"hardwaresecuritymodules/resource-manager/readme.md",
"tag":"package-2018-10",
"details":"> Loading AutoRest extension '@autorest/modelerfour' (4.15.456->4.15.456)"|
️️✔️[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️[Staging] SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️[Staging] Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
|
Thank you for your contribution tombuildsstuff! We will review the pull request and get back to you soon. |
|
@ArcturusZhang - is anything else needed for this one? |
tombuildsstuff
commented
Aug 12, 2021
| ] | ||
| ], | ||
| "x-ms-enum": { | ||
| "name": "SkuName", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the Azure SDK for Go currently outputs this as Name but I think that's misleading: https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-go/blob/d1ac3e5a036ec3804cf9aece096a0a914055bfd6/services/preview/hardwaresecuritymodules/mgmt/2018-10-31-preview/hardwaresecuritymodules/enums.go#L34-L45
Happy to change this if needed however
|
@dw511214992 @jhendrixMSFT @vasanthrajams @ifross89 @vakkinep @changlong-liu apologies for the ping (I searched for people involved with this Swagger previously) - but what's needed to get this merged? |
ArcturusZhang
approved these changes
Aug 24, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no objections on merging this PR.
@vakkinep could you please take a look when you get a chance as code owner?
Also this might introduce breaking changes to other SDKs as well. Calling attention for other SDK owners.
@msyyc @qiaozha @weidongxu-microsoft
|
Java hasn't released for the service, so we are good. |
|
Python hasn't released for the service, so we are good. |
|
Hi @tombuildsstuff I added one commit to enable the SDK automation on this PR so that we could verify the Go SDK is properly generated on this PR. |
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:
in s360Contribution 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 apply to the PR so that label “WaitForARMFeedback” will be added automatically to begin ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays to the manifest.
-[ ] To review changes efficiently, ensure you copy the existing version into the new directory structure for first commit (including refactoring) and then push new changes, including version updates, in separate commits.
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.