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.

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

Update Get.json #4961

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 2, 2019
Merged

Update Get.json #4961

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 2, 2019

Conversation

shouyangli
Copy link
Contributor

@shouyangli shouyangli commented Dec 25, 2018

Sorry for not familiar with github and create 2 PRs.
Same as PR #4960
Quota value should not be negative. It will output wrong document at:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/rest/api/azurestack/storagequotas/get

Latest improvements:

MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.

Contribution checklist:

  • I have reviewed the documentation for the workflow.
  • Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.
  • The OpenAPI Hub was used for checking validation status and next steps.

ARM API Review Checklist

  • Service team MUST add the "WaitForARMFeedback" label if the management plane API changes fall into one of the below categories.
  • adding/removing APIs.
  • adding/removing properties.
  • adding/removing API-version.
  • adding a new service in Azure.

Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs.

  • If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged urgently, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.
    Please follow the link to find more details on API review process.

Same as PR Azure#4960 
Quota value should not be negative. It will output wrong document at:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/rest/api/azurestack/storagequotas/get
@openapi-portal-comment
Copy link

If you're a MSFT employee, click this link
to view this PR's validation status on our new OpenAPI Hub spec management tool.

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Dec 25, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

Unable to detect any generation context from this PR.

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Dec 25, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

Unable to detect any generation context from this PR.

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Dec 25, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

Unable to detect any generation context from this PR.

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Dec 25, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-js

Unable to detect any generation context from this PR.

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Dec 25, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-java

Unable to detect any generation context from this PR.

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Dec 25, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-ruby

Unable to detect any generation context from this PR.

@azuresdkci
Copy link
Contributor

Hello!!

The Rest API Specs team wishes everyone a happy holiday and would like to kindly inform you that responses and review to Pull request will be delayed during the holiday period (now -> 2nds of January) to allow for Awesome reviewers to have an awesome time with their families during the holidays!

Thanks and Have a WONDERFUL HOLIDAY

@azuresdkci
Copy link
Contributor

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@sarangan12 sarangan12 merged commit 2d5af45 into Azure:master Jan 2, 2019
@kpajdzik kpajdzik removed the review label Jan 2, 2019
TalluriAnusha pushed a commit to AsrOneSdk/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Feb 6, 2019
Same as PR Azure#4960 
Quota value should not be negative. It will output wrong document at:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/rest/api/azurestack/storagequotas/get
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants