[Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.ResourceHealth to add version preview/2023-07-01-preview #24861
Conversation
…2022-10-01-preview to version 2023-07-01-preview
Swagger Validation Report
|
| compared swaggers (via Oad v0.10.4)] | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| ResourceHealth.json | 2023-07-01-preview(16a3acc) | 2022-10-01(main) |
| ResourceHealth.json | 2023-07-01-preview(16a3acc) | 2022-10-01-preview(main) |
The following breaking changes are detected by comparison with the latest stable version:
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️⚠️LintDiff: 22 Warnings warning [Detail]
| compared tags (via openapi-validator v2.1.4) | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| package-preview-2023-07 | package-preview-2023-07(16a3acc) | default(main) |
[must fix]The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The response schema of operations API '/providers/Microsoft.ResourceHealth/operations' does not match the ARM specification. Please standardize the schema. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L142 |
|
Operations API path must follow the schema provided in the common types. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L143 |
|
Get endpoints for collections of resources must only have the value and nextLink properties in their model.Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L189 |
|
$filter is a query parameter. Post operation must not contain any query parameter other than api-version. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L508 |
|
$filter is a query parameter. Post operation must not contain any query parameter other than api-version. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L553 |
|
Query parameter $filter should be removed. Point Get's MUST not have query parameters other than api version. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L640 |
|
Query parameter queryStartTime should be removed. Point Get's MUST not have query parameters other than api version. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L640 |
|
Query parameter $filter should be removed. Point Get's MUST not have query parameters other than api version. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L766 |
|
Query parameter queryStartTime should be removed. Point Get's MUST not have query parameters other than api version. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L766 |
|
The resource name parameter 'issueName' should be defined with a 'pattern' restriction. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L920 |
|
The top-level resource 'MetadataEntity' does not have list by subscription operation, please add it. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1445 |
|
The top-level resource 'emergingIssuesGetResult' does not have list by subscription operation, please add it. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1946 |
| Based on the response model schema, operation 'Operations_List' might be pageable. Consider adding the x-ms-pageable extension. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L128 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: GetMetadata Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L326 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: ImpactedResourcesGet Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L494 |
|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'listsecurityadvisoryimpactedresources' in:'SecurityAdvisoryImpactedResources_ListBySubscriptionIdAndEventId'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L506 |
|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'listsecurityadvisoryimpactedresources' in:'SecurityAdvisoryImpactedResources_ListByTenantIdAndEventId'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L551 |
|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'fetcheventdetails' in:'Event_fetchDetailsBySubscriptionIdAndTrackingId'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L683 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: ListEventsByTenantId Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L752 |
|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'fetcheventdetails' in:'Event_fetchDetailsByTenantIdAndTrackingId'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L806 |
|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: GetEmergingIssues Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L949 |
|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1070 |
|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1106 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1148 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1152 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1160 |
|
| Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1164 |
|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1182 |
|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1238 |
|
Property location must have 'x-ms-mutability':['read', 'create'] extension defined.Location: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json#L1556 |
️❌Avocado: 1 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The default tag should contain all APIs. The API path /subscriptions/{}/providers/Microsoft.ResourceHealth/impactedResources is not in the default tag. Please make sure the missing API swaggers are in the default tag.readme: specification/resourcehealth/resource-manager/readme.md json: Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2018-08-01/ResourceHealth.json |
️️✔️SwaggerAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️TypeSpecAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️PoliCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passed for PoliCheck.
️️✔️PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
️️✔️PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Summary.
️️✔️Automated merging requirements met succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
|
Hi, @mkatkam! Thank you for your pull request. To help get your PR merged: Generated ApiView comment added to this PR. You can use ApiView to show API versions diff. |
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
Generated ApiView
|
...icrosoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/examples/Events_ListBySingleResource.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...lth/resource-manager/Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...lth/resource-manager/Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...lth/resource-manager/Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...lth/resource-manager/Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...lth/resource-manager/Microsoft.ResourceHealth/preview/2023-07-01-preview/ResourceHealth.json
Show resolved
Hide resolved
mkatkam
force-pushed
the
mkatkam-resourcehealth-Microsoft.ResourceHealth-2023-07-01-preview
branch
from
b4f0afb to
e9e9c78
Compare
AzureRestAPISpecReview
added
ARMChangesRequested
ARMReview
BreakingChangeReviewRequired
|
Hi @mkatkam! The automation detected breaking changes in this pull request. As a result, it added the |
|
Please address or respond to feedback from the ARM API reviewer. |
|
Hi @mkatkam! Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI issues, if present, in following order:
If you need further help, please reach out on the Teams channel aka.ms/azsdk/support/specreview-channel. |
…ents Object and modified examples accordingly
mkatkam
force-pushed
the
mkatkam-resourcehealth-Microsoft.ResourceHealth-2023-07-01-preview
branch
from
e9e9c78 to
16a3acc
Compare
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
|
Hi, @mkatkam. Your PR has no update for 14 days and it is marked as stale PR. If no further update for over 14 days, the bot will close the PR. If you want to refresh the PR, please remove |
Next Steps to Merge
|
|
|
Automatic PR validation started. This comment will be populated with next steps to merge this PR once validation is completed. Please wait ⌛. |
Hi, The breaking changes tag was added because I changed the description of a property, but currently I removed everything and kept as is. So, currently there are no breaking changes. |
mkatkam
removed
ARMChangesRequested
CI-BreakingChange-JavaScript
BreakingChangeReviewRequired
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
But that doesn't really explain these errors does it?
|
| }, | ||
| "maintenanceId": { | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "Unique Id for Planned maintenance event" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will fix this. Thank you!
| }, | ||
| "maintenanceId": { | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "Unique Id for Planned maintenance event" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Doc style - they should be "planned maintenance events" (all lowercase) - no need to uppercase this in English docs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will fix this, thank you!
| }, | ||
| "argQuery": { | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "ARG Query to fetch the affected resources from their existing ARG locations" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You should expand out the acronym ARG in case its not obvious to people in the context of Microsoft.ResourceHealth docs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will expand ARG, thank you!
| }, | ||
| "extensionName": { | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "It provides the name of portal extension to produce link for given service health event." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest a doc style/content change "It provides the name of portal extension to produce link for given service health event." to just "The name of the Azure portal extension to link to for the given service health event."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Quick question on this - We want to correct this and make it better, but will it not create another breaking change as I am changing something that is already existing.?
| }, | ||
| "bladeName": { | ||
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "It provides the name of portal extension blade to produce link for given service health event." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest a doc style/content change to just "The name of the Azure portal extension blade to link to for the given service health event."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since this is already existing, I am wondering if this will be a breaking change if I change this.
| "type": "string", | ||
| "description": "It provides the name of portal extension blade to produce link for given service health event." | ||
| }, | ||
| "parameters": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this object definition doesn't include a proper type declaration that explains how the mapping would be used by an API consumer.
| }, | ||
| "parameters": { | ||
| "type": "object", | ||
| "description": "It provides a map of parameter name and value for portal extension blade to produce lik for given service health event." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
typo 'lik' - I wonder if its not caught by spellcheck. Should it be link?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will fix this, but will check if this will cause any breaking changes if I change this. And then proceed accordingly.
| "hirStage": "resolved", | ||
| "maintenanceId": "{maintenanceId}", | ||
| "maintenanceType": "{maintenanceType}", | ||
| "argQuery": "{argQuery}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
are these realistic enough values that you would want to show in your example docs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are not realistic values, will try to add sample values for the examples. Thank you for your suggestion.
From looking at the PR diff some more, looks like you based it off an old preview version 2022-10-01-preview instead of the latest stable version? If that's just accidental probably you should fix it, so people can you all your features with the new preview. |
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
Yes, I confirmed with my team as well that I should be using the latest stable version as the base version. So, I will create another PR with base version as 2022-10-01. Is there any other way I can use the same PR ? |
Yes, I think not using the latest stable version as the base version caused this. I will fix these by using the latest stable version. |
|
Closing this PR as this is incorrectly based off of 2022-10-01-preview instead of 2022-10-01. |
This is a PR generated at OpenAPI Hub. You can view your work branch via this link.
ARM (Control Plane) API Specification Update Pull Request
PR review workflow diagram
Please understand this diagram before proceeding. It explains how to get your PR approved & merged.
Purpose of this PR
What's the purpose of this PR? Check all that apply. This is mandatory!
Due diligence checklist
To merge this PR, you must go through the following checklist and confirm you understood
and followed the instructions by checking all the boxes:
ARM resource provider contract and
REST guidelines (estimated time: 4 hours).
I understand this is required before I can request review from an ARM API Review board.
ARM API changes review
ARMReviewlabel.ARMReviewlabel, if appropriate.If this happens, proceed according to guidance given in GitHub comments also added by the automation.
Breaking change review
If you have any breaking changes as defined in the Breaking Change Policy,
follow the process outlined in the High-level Breaking Change Process doc.
Getting help
and https://aka.ms/ci-fix.