iotDefenderSettings - Add onboardingKind property #13434
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, @liranc 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 |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| The default tag contains multiple API versions swaggers. readme: specification/security/resource-manager/readme.md tag: specification/security/resource-manager/readme.md#tag-package-composite-v3 |
️️✔️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.
️❌[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation: 3 Errors, 35 Warnings failed [Detail]
Only 10 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
"readme":"security/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-composite-v3", "details":"Duplicate Schema named ExternalSecuritySolutionKind -- type: undefined => "string", properties: "kind":"description":"The kind of the external solution", "$ref":"#/components/schemas/ExternalSecuritySolutionKind" =>, enum: undefined => ["CEF", "ATA", "AAD"], x-ms-enum: undefined => "name":"ExternalSecuritySolutionKind", "modelAsString":true, "values":["value":"CEF", "value":"ATA", "value":"AAD"] ; This error can be temporarily avoided by using the 'modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication' setting. NOTE: This setting will be removed in a future version of @autorest/modelerfour; schemas should be updated to fix this issue sooner than that." |
|
"readme":"security/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-composite-v3", "details":"Duplicate Schema named AadConnectivityState -- type: undefined => "string", properties: "connectivityState":"$ref":"#/components/schemas/AadConnectivityState" =>, title: undefined => "The connectivity state of the external AAD solution ", enum: undefined => ["Discovered", "NotLicensed", "Connected"], x-ms-enum: undefined => "name":"AadConnectivityState", "modelAsString":true, "values":["value":"Discovered", "value":"NotLicensed", "value":"Connected"] ; This error can be temporarily avoided by using the 'modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication' setting. NOTE: This setting will be removed in a future version of @autorest/modelerfour; schemas should be updated to fix this issue sooner than that." |
|
"readme":"security/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-composite-v3", "details":"Error: Plugin prechecker reported failure." |
| "readme":"iotsecurity/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"2021-02-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'ErrorResponseModel-error' with an undefined type and 'allOf'/'anyOf'/'oneOf' is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"iotsecurity/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"2021-02-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'Resource' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"iotsecurity/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"2021-02-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'ProxyResource' with an undefined type and 'allOf'/'anyOf'/'oneOf' is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"iotsecurity/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"2021-02-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'ErrorDetail' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"iotsecurity/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"2021-02-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'ErrorResponse' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"iotsecurity/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"2021-02-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'ErrorAdditionalInfo' with an undefined type and decalared properties is a bit ambigious. This has been auto-corrected to 'type:object'" |
|
| "readme":"iotsecurity/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"2021-02-01-preview", "details":"Checking for duplicate schemas, this could take a (long) while. Run with --verbose for more detail." |
️️✔️[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️[Staging] SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
liranc
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
|
Hi @liranc, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
openapi-pipeline-app
bot
added
BreakingChangeReviewRequired
and removed
CI-FixRequiredOnFailure
labels
|
Hi @liranc, 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. |
|
NewApiVersionRequired reason: |
@ruowan This PR contains breaking changes (new property for existing api-version), however this is a preview API version, so AFAIK this alert can be ignored. |
|
The PR have breaking changes in public preview, it still need to go through breaking change review process. |
ruowan
added
the
Approved-BreakingChange
ruowan
approved these changes
Mar 18, 2021
This was referenced Mar 18, 2021
Closed
This was referenced Mar 18, 2021
Closed
MirzaSikander
pushed a commit
to MirzaSikander/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 22, 2021
* onboardingKind field * Missing property in PUT example Co-authored-by: Liran Chen <lirche@microsoft.com>
mkarmark
pushed a commit
to mkarmark/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2021
* onboardingKind field * Missing property in PUT example Co-authored-by: Liran Chen <lirche@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
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 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.