Remove 2014-04-01 TDE related swagger and example #16065
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, @kingsleyAzure 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 new version is missing a path that was found in the old version. Was path '/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Sql/servers/{serverName}/databases/{databaseName}/transparentDataEncryption/{transparentDataEncryptionName}' removed or restructured? Old: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L111:5 |
|
The new version is missing a path that was found in the old version. Was path '/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Sql/servers/{serverName}/databases/{databaseName}/transparentDataEncryption/{transparentDataEncryptionName}/operationResults' removed or restructured? Old: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L216:5 |
|
The new version is missing a definition that was found in the old version. Was 'TransparentDataEncryptionProperties' removed or renamed? New: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L112:3 Old: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L266:3 |
|
The new version is missing a definition that was found in the old version. Was 'TransparentDataEncryption' removed or renamed? New: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L112:3 Old: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L266:3 |
|
The new version is missing a client parameter that was found in the old version. Was 'TransparentDataEncryptionNameParameter' removed or renamed? New: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L519:3 Old: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L768:3 |
️⚠️LintDiff: 3 Warnings warning [Detail]
- Linted configuring files (Based on source branch, openapi-validator v1.10.1 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.10 )
- Linted configuring files (Based on target branch, openapi-validator v1.10.1 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.10 )
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| The operation 'TransparentDataEncryptions_CreateOrUpdate' returns 202 status code, which indicates a long running operation, please enable 'x-ms-long-running-operation. Location: Microsoft.Sql/preview/2021-02-01-preview/TransparentDataEncryptions.json#L82 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Get a database's transparent data encryption Location: Microsoft.Sql/preview/2021-02-01-preview/TransparentDataEncryptions.json#L76 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: Update a database's Transparent Data Encryption state with minimal parameters Location: Microsoft.Sql/preview/2021-02-01-preview/TransparentDataEncryptions.json#L156 |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
Model definition 'FirewallRule' must have the properties 'name', 'id' and 'type' in its hierarchy and these properties must be marked as readonly. Location: Microsoft.Sql/preview/2020-11-01-preview/FirewallRules.json#L308 |
|
Model definition 'ProxyResourceWithWritableName' must have the properties 'name', 'id' and 'type' in its hierarchy and these properties must be marked as readonly. Location: Microsoft.Sql/preview/2020-11-01-preview/FirewallRules.json#L298 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/backups_legacy.json#L52 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/backups_legacy.json#L88 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/connectionPolicies.json#L57 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/connectionPolicies.json#L100 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/dataMasking.json#L63 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/dataMasking.json#L103 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/dataMasking.json#L170 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/dataMasking.json#L218 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/geoBackupPolicies.json#L64 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/geoBackupPolicies.json#L114 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/geoBackupPolicies.json#L157 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/metrics.json#L59 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/metrics.json#L105 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/metrics.json#L158 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/metrics.json#L204 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/replicationLinks_legacy.json#L59 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/replicationLinks_legacy.json#L109 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/replicationLinks_legacy.json#L160 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/replicationLinks_legacy.json#L220 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/serverCommunicationLinks.json#L52 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/serverCommunicationLinks.json#L90 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/serverCommunicationLinks.json#L140 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/serverCommunicationLinks.json#L180 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/serviceObjectives.json#L52 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01/serviceObjectives.json#L88 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L52 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/sql.core_legacy.json#L98 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.Sql/stable/2014-04-01-legacy/usages_legacy.json#L45 |
️⚠️Avocado: 1 Warnings warning [Detail]
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| The default tag contains multiple API versions swaggers. readme: specification/sql/resource-manager/readme.md tag: specification/sql/resource-manager/readme.md#tag-package-composite-v5 |
️️✔️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
️️✔️[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).
|
Thank you for your contribution kingsleyAzure! We will review the pull request and get back to you soon. |
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
|
Hi @kingsleyAzure, 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. |
ericshape
approved these changes
Sep 16, 2021
This was referenced Sep 16, 2021
This was referenced Sep 16, 2021
|
@fengzhou-msft could you help check .net SDK failure? |
checked with feng the .net SDK failure is due to the out of date tests in .net SDK repo. It's good we can ignore this failure for the PR. |
|
approve for python breaking change. |
This was referenced Sep 17, 2021
ghost
pushed a commit
to Azure/azure-resource-manager-schemas
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 17, 2021
Hardell
pushed a commit
to Hardell/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 27, 2021
* add TDE V5 tag and remove it from sql.core.legacy.json * Revert "add TDE V5 tag and remove it from sql.core.legacy.json" This reverts commit 78c2844. * initial Co-authored-by: Yueren Wang <yuerenwa@microsoft.com>
LeiWang3
pushed a commit
to LeiWang3/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 31, 2022
* add TDE V5 tag and remove it from sql.core.legacy.json * Revert "add TDE V5 tag and remove it from sql.core.legacy.json" This reverts commit 78c2844. * initial Co-authored-by: Yueren Wang <yuerenwa@microsoft.com>
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:
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 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 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.