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

[SRP] Create separate example for enable AD on storage account #7664

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 30, 2019

Conversation

zfchen95
Copy link
Contributor

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.

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Oct 29, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

Encountered a Subprocess error: (azure-sdk-for-python)

Command: ['/usr/local/bin/autorest', '/tmp/tmp6ttur5c6/rest/specification/storage/resource-manager/readme.md', '--perform-load=false', '--swagger-to-sdk', '--output-artifact=configuration.json', '--input-file=foo', '--output-folder=/tmp/tmp7_addi_i']
Finished with return code 7
and output:

AutoRest code generation utility [version: 2.0.4283; node: v8.12.0]
(C) 2018 Microsoft Corporation.
https://aka.ms/autorest
Failure:
Error: Unable to start AutoRest Core from /root/.autorest/@microsoft.azure_autorest-core@2.0.4405/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core
Error: Unable to start AutoRest Core from /root/.autorest/@microsoft.azure_autorest-core@2.0.4405/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core
    at main (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/app.js:232:19)
    at <anonymous>

/root/.autorest/@microsoft.azure_autorest-core@2.0.4405/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core/dist/app.js:33
    autorest_core_1.Shutdown();
    ^
ReferenceError: autorest_core_1 is not defined
    at process.on (/root/.autorest/@microsoft.azure_autorest-core@2.0.4405/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core/dist/app.js:33:5)
    at emitOne (events.js:121:20)
    at process.emit (events.js:211:7)
    at process.emit (/node_modules/source-map-support/source-map-support.js:439:21)
fs.js:612
  return binding.close(fd);
                 ^

Error: EBADF: bad file descriptor, close
    at Object.fs.closeSync (fs.js:612:18)
    at StaticVolumeFile.shutdown (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/static-loader.js:352:10)
    at StaticFilesystem.shutdown (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/static-loader.js:406:17)
    at process.exit.n [as exit] (/opt/node_modules/autorest/dist/static-loader.js:169:11)
    at printErrorAndExit (/node_modules/source-map-support/source-map-support.js:423:11)
    at process.emit (/node_modules/source-map-support/source-map-support.js:435:16)
    at process._fatalException (bootstrap_node.js:391:26)

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Oct 29, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-go

@azuresdkci
Copy link
Contributor

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@ChenTanyi ChenTanyi added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 30, 2019
@zfchen95
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ChenTanyi Hi, it is example changes. Why would it need ARM feedback?

@ChenTanyi
Copy link
Contributor

@zfchen95 the last file is not the examples. It is the api change.

@ChenTanyi ChenTanyi removed the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Oct 30, 2019
@ChenTanyi
Copy link
Contributor

@zfchen95 sorry for mistake the change, it is just a example

@ChenTanyi ChenTanyi merged commit 9ea7ae9 into Azure:master Oct 30, 2019
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.

4 participants