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] Publish private branch 'datafactory/eldasilva/addExecutionInfoToSetVariable' #24306

Conversation

HugoLabraMSFT
Copy link
Contributor

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

ARM API Information (Control Plane)

Changelog

Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:

  1. What's the purpose of the update?
    • new service onboarding
    • new API version
    • update existing version for new feature
    • update existing version to fix swagger quality issue in s360
    • Other, please clarify
  2. When are you targeting to deploy the new service/feature to public regions? Please provide the date or, if the date is not yet available, the month.
  3. When do you expect to publish the swagger? Please provide date or, the the date is not yet available, the month.
  4. By default, Azure SDKs of all languages (.NET/Python/Java/JavaScript for both management-plane SDK and data-plane SDK, Go for management-plane SDK only ) MUST be refreshed with/after swagger of new version is published. If you prefer NOT to refresh any specific SDK language upon swagger updates in the current PR, please leave details with justification here.

Contribution checklist (MS Employees Only):

If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.

ARM API Review Checklist

Applicability: ⚠️

If your changes encompass only the following scenarios, you should SKIP this section, as these scenarios do not require ARM review.

  • Change to data plane APIs
  • Adding new properties
  • All removals

Otherwise your PR may be subject to ARM review requirements. Complete the following:

  • Check this box if any of the following apply to the PR so that the label "ARMReview" and "WaitForARMFeedback" will be added by bot to kick off ARM API Review. Missing to check this box in the following scenario may result in delays to the ARM manifest review and deployment.

    • Adding a new service
    • Adding new API(s)
    • Adding a new API version
      -[ ] To review changes efficiently, ensure you copy the existing version into the new directory structure for first commit and then push new changes, including version updates, in separate commits. You can use OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. For more details refer to the wiki. Note that this doesn't apply if you are trying to merge a PR that was previously in the private repository.
  • 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 you have any breaking changes as defined in the Breaking Change Policy, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board.

Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Additional details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking Change Wiki.

NOTE: To update API(s) in public preview for over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)

Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.

@HugoLabraMSFT
Copy link
Contributor Author

The PR is created based on the updates in the private branch. The updates in the PR has already been reviewed and approved with this PR Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/12281

@openapi-workflow-bot
Copy link

Hi, @HugoLabraMSFT 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 Jun 5, 2023

    Swagger Validation Report

    ️❌BreakingChange: 1 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
    compared swaggers (via Oad v0.10.4)] new version base version
    Pipeline.json 2018-06-01(48b03ba) 2018-06-01(main)
    Rule Message
    1045 - AddedOptionalProperty The new version has a new optional property 'policy' that was not found in the old version.
    New: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L7755:7
    Old: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L7755:7
    ️️✔️Breaking Change(Cross-Version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There are no breaking changes.
    ️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There is no credential detected.
    ️⚠️LintDiff: 2 Warnings warning [Detail]
    compared tags (via openapi-validator v2.1.2) new version base version
    package-2018-06 package-2018-06(48b03ba) package-2018-06(main)

    [must fix]The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:

    Rule Message Related RPC [For API reviewers]
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L7792
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L7796


    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

    Rule Message
    ⚠️ AvoidNestedProperties Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience
    Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L68
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L273
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L277
    ⚠️ SchemaDescriptionOrTitle Schema should have a description or title.
    Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L3094
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L6324
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L6611
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L6631
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L6867
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L7094
    ⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean 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: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L7782
    ⚠️ AvoidNestedProperties Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience
    Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L8028
    ⚠️ AvoidNestedProperties Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience
    Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/Pipeline.json#L8155
    ️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for Avocado.
    ️️✔️ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    ️⚠️~[Staging] ServiceAPIReadinessTest: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]

    API Test is not triggered due to precheck failure. Check pipeline log for details.

    ️️✔️SwaggerAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    ️️✔️CadlAPIView 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).
    ️️✔️CadlValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for CadlValidation.
    ️️✔️TypeSpec Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for TypeSpec Validation.
    ️❌PR Summary: 0 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 5, 2023

    Swagger Generation Artifacts

    ️️✔️ApiDocPreview succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️❌SDK Breaking Change Tracking failed [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️❌ azure-sdk-for-net-track2 failed [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-python-track2 warning [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-java warning [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-go succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-js succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️⚠️ azure-resource-manager-schemas warning [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️❌ azure-powershell failed [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 5, 2023

    Generated ApiView

    Language Package Name ApiView Link
    Go sdk/resourcemanager/datafactory/armdatafactory https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/ed289f1b9b164f609a08dd413e971b67
    Java azure-resourcemanager-datafactory https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/632c18b93a3c4b33b5e3ffbcb6c9d445
    JavaScript @azure/arm-datafactory https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/4cbfcfe4d1d84c2ca444744e764816dc

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    The automation detected this Pull Request introduces breaking changes to an existing API version and hence it added the NewApiVersionRequired label. This means you cannot proceed with merging this PR until you complete one of the following action items:

    - A) Submit a new PR instead of this one, or modify this PR, so that it introduces a new API version instead of introducing breaking changes to an existing API version. The automation will remove the label once it detects there are no more breaking changes.
    - B) OR you can request an approval of the breaking changes, get it reviewed, and approved. The reviewer will add Approved-BreakingChange label if they approve.

    For additional guidance, please see https://aka.ms/NewApiVersionRequired

    @v-jiaodi
    Copy link
    Member

    v-jiaodi commented Jun 6, 2023

    Add label Approved-BreakingChange because JeffreyRichter has already approved it in PR https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/pull/12281

    @v-jiaodi v-jiaodi added the Approved-BreakingChange DO NOT USE! OBSOLETE label. See https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 label Jun 6, 2023
    @v-jiaodi
    Copy link
    Member

    v-jiaodi commented Jun 6, 2023

    @elisauhura
    Copy link
    Contributor

    /azp run unifiedPipeline

    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    No pipelines are associated with this pull request.

    @v-jiaodi
    Copy link
    Member

    v-jiaodi commented Jun 8, 2023

    /azp run

    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

    @v-jiaodi
    Copy link
    Member

    v-jiaodi commented Jun 8, 2023

    @qiaozha @raych1 @msyyc, could you help to take a look at the SDK breakingchange error in this PR? Thanks

    @raych1 raych1 added the Approved-SdkBreakingChange-Go Approve the breaking change tracking for azure-sdk-for-go label Jun 9, 2023
    @v-jiaodi v-jiaodi added the Approved-OkToMerge <valid label in PR review process>add this label when assignee approve to merge the updates label Jun 9, 2023
    @weidongxu-microsoft weidongxu-microsoft merged commit a0232d7 into main Jun 13, 2023
    @weidongxu-microsoft weidongxu-microsoft deleted the published/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/datafactory/eldasilva/addExecutionInfoToSetVariable branch June 13, 2023 02:15
    harryli0108 pushed a commit to harryli0108/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2023
    …utionInfoToSetVariable' (Azure#24306)
    
    * [AutoSync] 2ae6357790 Make new policy generic
    
    * Fix typo
    
    ---------
    
    Co-authored-by: swagger-automation <swagger@microsoft.com>
    Co-authored-by: Elisa Uhura Pereira da Silva <elisa@uhura.cc>
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Labels
    Approved-BreakingChange DO NOT USE! OBSOLETE label. See https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 Approved-OkToMerge <valid label in PR review process>add this label when assignee approve to merge the updates Approved-SdkBreakingChange-Go Approve the breaking change tracking for azure-sdk-for-go Approved-SdkBreakingChange-JavaScript Approved-SdkBreakingChange-Python CI-BreakingChange-Go CI-BreakingChange-JavaScript Data Factory NewApiVersionRequired resource-manager
    Projects
    None yet
    Development

    Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

    8 participants