-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.1k
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] Add allowSharedKeyAccess property support #11756
Conversation
Swagger Validation Report
|
Rule | Message |
---|---|
1041 - AddedPropertyInResponse |
The new version has a new property 'allowSharedKeyAccess' in response that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Storage/preview/2020-08-01-preview/storage.json#L2783:7 Old: Microsoft.Storage/preview/2020-08-01-preview/storage.json#L2779:7 |
1041 - AddedPropertyInResponse |
The new version has a new property 'allowSharedKeyAccess' in response that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2019-04-01/storage.json#L1624:7 Old: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2019-04-01/storage.json#L1620:7 |
1041 - AddedPropertyInResponse |
The new version has a new property 'allowSharedKeyAccess' in response that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2019-06-01/storage.json#L2433:7 Old: Microsoft.Storage/stable/2019-06-01/storage.json#L2429:7 |
️️✔️
LintDiff succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for LintDiff.
️️✔️
Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️
ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️
SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️
[Staging] Cross Version BreakingChange (Base on preview version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️
[Staging] Cross Version BreakingChange (Base on stable version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️
CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
Unsure what is the breaking change here. This is a preview version and a new additive property has been added. |
Please go through the breaking change process to request an exception if you feel this is not a breaking change for your consumers |
Hi @HimanshuChhabra, 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. |
Kindly explain the breaking change. This is an Evolutionary change in a Preview Api version. : https://github.com/microsoft/api-guidelines/blob/vNext/azure/Guidelines.md#versioning |
Raised a workitem as per the request: https://msazure.visualstudio.com/One/_workitems/edit/8863671 |
}, | ||
"allowSharedKeyAccess": { | ||
"type": "boolean", | ||
"description": "Indicates whether the storage account permits requests to be authorized with the account access key via Shared Key. If false, then all requests, including shared access signatures, must be authorized with Azure Active Directory (Azure AD). The default value is null, which is equivalent to true." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if the default is true please add "default": true so consuming services know that it is a non standard default
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The default value is null, if it is not set the behavior is the same as when set true.
* Add allowSharedKeyAccess property support * Remove x-ms-clientname as it cannot be same as property name as per new ARM rules * backfill June19 and April19 Api versions with allowsharedkeyaccess
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
Changelog
Please ensure to add changelog with 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
Ensure to check this box if one of the following scenarios meet updates in the PR, so that label “WaitForARMFeedback” will be added automatically to involve ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs, all “removals” and “adding a new property” no more require ARM API review.
Please 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 there are following updates in the PR, ensure to request an approval from API 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.