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

[Hub Generated] Review request for Creator to add version preview/2022-09-01-preview #19889

Merged

Conversation

zhugexubin
Copy link
Member

@zhugexubin zhugexubin commented Jul 21, 2022

This is a PR generated at OpenAPI Hub. You can view your work branch via this link.

Data Plane API - Pull Request

API Info: The Basics

Most of the information about your service should be captured in the issue that serves as your engagement record.

  • Link to engagement record issue:

Is this review for (select one):

  • a private preview
  • a public preview
  • GA release

Change Scope

This section will help us focus on the specific parts of your API that are new or have been modified.
Please share a link to the design document for the new APIs, a link to the previous Open API document (swagger) if applicable, and the root paths that have been updated.

  • Design Document:
  • Previous Open API Doc:
  • Updated paths:

❔Got questions? Need additional info?? We are here to help!

Contact us!

The Azure API Review Board is dedicated to helping you create amazing APIs. You can read about our mission and learn more about our process on our wiki.

Click here for links to tools, specs, guidelines & other good stuff

Tooling

Guidelines & Specifications

Helpful Links

@openapi-workflow-bot
Copy link

Hi, @zhugexubin Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips.

  • Please ensure to do self-check against checklists in first PR comment.
  • PR assignee is the person auto-assigned and responsible for your current PR reviewing and merging.
  • For specs comparison cross API versions, Use API Specs Comparison Report Generator
  • If there is CI failure(s), to fix CI error(s) is mandatory for PR merging; or you need to provide justification in PR comment for explanation. How to fix?

  • Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. vscswagger@microsoft.com

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jul 21, 2022

    Swagger Validation Report

    ️️✔️BreakingChange succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There are no breaking changes.
    ️⚠️Breaking Change(Cross-Version): 9 Warnings warning [Detail]
    compared swaggers (via Oad v0.9.6)] new version base version
    tileset.json 2022-09-01-preview(d5458bc) 2.0(main)

    The following breaking changes are detected by comparison with the latest preview version:

    Rule Message
    ⚠️ 1006 - RemovedDefinition The new version is missing a definition that was found in the old version. Was '200AsyncV2' removed or renamed?
    New: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L59:3
    Old: Creator/preview/2.0/tileset.json#L59:3
    ⚠️ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged The new version has a different format than the previous one.
    New: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L454:9
    Old: Creator/preview/2.0/tileset.json#L309:9
    ⚠️ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged The new version has a different format than the previous one.
    New: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L460:9
    Old: Creator/preview/2.0/tileset.json#L314:9
    ⚠️ 1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L116:9
    Old: Creator/preview/2.0/tileset.json#L116:9
    ⚠️ 1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L156:9
    Old: Creator/preview/2.0/tileset.json#L150:9
    ⚠️ 1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L190:9
    Old: Creator/preview/2.0/tileset.json#L184:9
    ⚠️ 1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L221:9
    Old: Creator/preview/2.0/tileset.json#L215:9
    ⚠️ 1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L329:9
    Old: Creator/preview/2.0/tileset.json#L248:9
    ⚠️ 1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L61:5
    Old: Creator/preview/2.0/tileset.json#L61:5
    ️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There is no credential detected.
    ️⚠️LintDiff: 12 Warnings warning [Detail]
    compared tags (via openapi-validator v1.13.0) new version base version
    package-preview-2022-09 package-preview-2022-09(d5458bc) default(main)

    The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:

    Rule Message
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'MapConfigurationModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'MapConfiguration' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/mapconfiguration.json#L106
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'MapConfigurationModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'MapConfiguration' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/mapconfiguration.json#L150
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'MapConfigurationModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'MapConfiguration' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/mapconfiguration.json#L184
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'MapConfigurationModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'MapConfiguration' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/mapconfiguration.json#L226
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'MapConfigurationModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'MapConfiguration' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/mapconfiguration.json#L256
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'StyleModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Style' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/style.json#L106
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'StyleModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Style' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/style.json#L150
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'StyleModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Style' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/style.json#L184
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'StyleModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Style' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/style.json#L226
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'StyleModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Style' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/style.json#L256
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'TilesetModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Tileset' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L245
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'TilesetModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Tileset' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L278


    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

    Rule Message
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'TilesetModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Tileset' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L106
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'TilesetModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Tileset' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L150
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'TilesetModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Tileset' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L184
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'TilesetModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Tileset' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L215
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'TilesetModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'Tileset' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json#L320
    ️⚠️Avocado: 1 Warnings warning [Detail]
    Rule Message
    ⚠️ CIRCULAR_REFERENCE The JSON file has a circular reference.
    readme: maps/data-plane/Creator/readme.md
    json: Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/tileset.json
    ️️✔️ApiReadinessCheck 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.
    ️⚠️SDK Track2 Validation: 4 Warnings warning [Detail]
    • The following tags are being changed in this PR
      • "https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/d5458bc7e1d7906ef858f278d1c124c865400952/specification/maps/data-plane/Creator/readme.md#tag-package-preview-2022-09">maps/data-plane/Creator/readme.md#package-preview-2022-09
    The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
    Rule Message
    ⚠️ UnkownSecurityScheme "readme":"maps/data-plane/Creator/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2022-09",
    "details":"Security scheme SharedKey is unknown and will not be processed. Only supported types are AADToken,
    AzureKey,
    Anonymous"
    ⚠️ UnkownSecurityScheme "readme":"maps/data-plane/Creator/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2022-09",
    "details":"Security scheme SasToken is unknown and will not be processed. Only supported types are AADToken,
    AzureKey,
    Anonymous"
    ⚠️ Modeler/MissingType "readme":"maps/data-plane/Creator/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2022-09",
    "details":"The schema 'MapConfiguration-styles' has no type or format information whatsoever. Location:\n file:///mnt/vss/_work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/maps/data-plane/Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/mapconfiguration.json#/components/schemas/MapConfiguration-styles"
    ⚠️ Modeler/MissingType "readme":"maps/data-plane/Creator/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2022-09",
    "details":"The schema 'StyleObject-layers' has no type or format information whatsoever. Location:\n file:///mnt/vss/_work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/maps/data-plane/Creator/preview/2022-09-01-preview/mapconfiguration.json#/components/schemas/StyleObject-layers"
    ️️✔️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).
    ️️✔️CadlValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for CadlValidation.
    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jul 21, 2022

    Swagger pipeline restarted successfully, please wait for status update in this comment.

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    Hi @zhugexubin, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of Avocado, semantic validation, model validation, breaking change, lintDiff. If you have any questions, please post your questions in this channel https://aka.ms/swaggersupport.

    TaskHow to fixPriority
    AvocadoFix-AvocadoHigh
    Semantic validationFix-SemanticValidation-ErrorHigh
    Model validationFix-ModelValidation-ErrorHigh
    LintDiffFix-LintDiffhigh
    If you need further help, please feedback via swagger feedback.

    @zhugexubin zhugexubin marked this pull request as ready for review July 21, 2022 20:54
    @zhugexubin zhugexubin requested a review from a team as a code owner July 21, 2022 20:54
    @zhugexubin zhugexubin requested review from BlackRider97 and bexxx and removed request for a team July 21, 2022 20:54
    @zhugexubin
    Copy link
    Member Author

    This is the issue associated with this PR: #17312

    @tjprescott tjprescott assigned tjprescott and unassigned anuchandy Aug 2, 2022
    @tjprescott
    Copy link
    Member

    @zhugexubin has the API review board been scheduled for this new version?

    @zhugexubin
    Copy link
    Member Author

    @zhugexubin has the API review board been scheduled for this new version?

    @tjprescott We already finished the API review board process and fixed all the comments from the board there.

    @zhugexubin
    Copy link
    Member Author

    zhugexubin commented Aug 4, 2022

    #17312 This is the issue created with API Review board for the swagger changes. @tjprescott

    @tjprescott
    Copy link
    Member

    @zhugexubin I'm confused because this is the PR that issue links to: #18584

    This API version is 8 months later.

    @zhugexubin
    Copy link
    Member Author

    @zhugexubin I'm confused because this is the PR that issue links to: #18584

    This API version is 8 months later.

    Right, since we decided to change public preview API version from 2022-01-01-preview to 2022-09-01-preview, that's why I created another PR for the new version.

    @zhugexubin zhugexubin linked an issue Aug 8, 2022 that may be closed by this pull request
    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Aug 8, 2022

    Swagger pipeline restarted successfully. If there is ApiView generated, it will be updated in this comment.

    @tjprescott tjprescott merged commit 6555955 into Azure:main Aug 9, 2022
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Projects
    None yet
    Development

    Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

    [Maps - Styling] REST API Review for Azure Maps Styling Service
    3 participants