[DevOpsInfrastructure] Add .Management suffix to TypeSpec folder name

[mikeharder]

• Folder naming guidelines: https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/main/documentation/typespec-structure-guidelines.md
• Related: [typespec-validation] Error should be reported while missing 'Management' suffix in the folder name of management plane typespec #29654

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Next Steps to Merge

✅ All automated merging requirements have been met! To get your PR merged, see aka.ms/azsdk/specreview/merge.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Swagger Validation Report

️️✔️BreakingChange succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️️✔️Breaking Change(Cross-Version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There is no credential detected.

️️✔️LintDiff succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for LintDiff.

️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for Avocado.

️️✔️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.

️️✔️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]

_{Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?}

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Swagger Generation Artifacts

️️✔️ApiDocPreview succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

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

For more instructions, please refer to the FAQ .
• ⚠️Warning in generating from 687eac589dc4a053fb95943e5a6bc6e5c271eea4. SDK Automation 14.0.0

  command	sh scripts/automation_init.sh ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/initOutput.json
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target Packages (main/binary-amd64/Packages) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target Packages (main/binary-all/Packages) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target Translations (main/i18n/Translation-en) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target CNF (main/cnf/Commands-amd64) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target CNF (main/cnf/Commands-all) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target Packages (main/binary-amd64/Packages) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target Packages (main/binary-all/Packages) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target Translations (main/i18n/Translation-en) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target CNF (main/cnf/Commands-amd64) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] W: Target CNF (main/cnf/Commands-all) is configured multiple times in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.list:1 and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/azure-cli.sources:1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] WARNING: Skipping azure-nspkg as it is not installed.
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] npm notice
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] npm notice New minor version of npm available! 10.7.0 -> 10.8.1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] npm notice Changelog: https://github.com/npm/cli/releases/tag/v10.8.1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] npm notice To update run: npm install -g npm@10.8.1
  cmderr	[automation_init.sh] npm notice
  command	sh scripts/automation_generate.sh ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/generateOutput.json

• ️✔️azure-mgmt-devopsinfrastructure [Preview SDK Changes] Breaking Change Detected

  info	[Changelog] ### Features Added
  info	[Changelog]
  info	[Changelog]   - Added operation SubscriptionUsagesOperations.usages
  info	[Changelog]
  info	[Changelog] ### Breaking Changes
  info	[Changelog]
  info	[Changelog]   - Model Quota has a new required parameter current_value
  info	[Changelog]   - Model Quota has a new required parameter limit
  info	[Changelog]   - Model Quota has a new required parameter unit
  info	[Changelog]   - Model Quota no longer has parameter name
  info	[Changelog]   - Model Quota no longer has parameter properties
  info	[Changelog]   - Model Quota no longer has parameter system_data
  info	[Changelog]   - Model Quota no longer has parameter type
  info	[Changelog]   - Parameter id of model Quota is now required
  info	[Changelog]   - Removed operation SubscriptionUsagesOperations.list_by_location

  Present SDK breaking changes suppressions
  No suppression file added.

  Absent SDK breaking changes suppressions
  - Model Quota has a new required parameter current_value
  - Model Quota has a new required parameter limit
  - Model Quota has a new required parameter unit
  - Model Quota no longer has parameter name
  - Model Quota no longer has parameter properties
  - Model Quota no longer has parameter system_data
  - Model Quota no longer has parameter type
  - Parameter id of model Quota is now required
  - Removed operation SubscriptionUsagesOperations.list_by_location

  Parse Suppression File Errors
  No suppression file added.

  Please refer to the guidance for suppressing SDK breaking changes.

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

For more instructions, please refer to the FAQ .
• ️✔️Succeeded in generating from 687eac589dc4a053fb95943e5a6bc6e5c271eea4. SDK Automation 14.0.0

  command	./eng/mgmt/automation/init.sh ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/initOutput.json
  command	./eng/mgmt/automation/generate.py ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/generateOutput.json

• ️✔️azure-resourcemanager-devopsinfrastructure [Preview SDK Changes]

  info	[Changelog]

_{Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?}

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Generated ApiView

Language	Package Name	ApiView Link
Java	azure-resourcemanager-devopsinfrastructure	https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/43a6bc3c665749fea7eb1ea191b80cc4?revisionId=78b58b25752c4ddb9996bfad60faee3e
TypeSpec	Microsoft.DevOpsInfrastructure.Management	https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/b74500c6c20846619e6356e2a5c4189a?revisionId=bfadc28f781c4a94980c8483a590f702

[mikeharder]

@msyyc: Why did this PR get label BreakingChange-Python-Sdk?

[msyyc]

@msyyc: Why did this PR get label BreakingChange-Python-Sdk?

Hi, it is not caused by this PR and I have added approval label.

[mikeharder]

@msyyc: Why did this PR get label BreakingChange-Python-Sdk?

Hi, it is not caused by this PR and I have added approval label.

@msyyc: Are you saying the label was applied in error, and is a bug in the automation? If so, we need to find the root cause and open an issue.

CC: @konrad-jamrozik

[mikeharder]

@msyyc: Why did this PR get label BreakingChange-Python-Sdk?

Hi, it is not caused by this PR and I have added approval label.

@msyyc: Are you saying the label was applied in error, and is a bug in the automation? If so, we need to find the root cause and open an issue.

CC: @konrad-jamrozik

@msyyc: Were you able to diagnose why the BreakingChange-Python-Sdk label was added? Was it a bug in our automation?

[msyyc]

If braking change items of PR A is not added into sdk-suprressions.yaml then the PR A is merged, those items are still detected in later PR B unless those items are added into .yaml file or the SDK is released with PR A. It is by design and not bug so don't worry about it.

[konrad-jamrozik]

If braking change items of PR A is not added into sdk-suprressions.yaml then the PR A is merged, those items are still detected in later PR B unless those items are added into .yaml file or the SDK is released with PR A. It is by design and not bug so don't worry about it.

@msyyc per my understanding, according to this document we agreed to use sdk-suppressions.yaml file exactly to avoid situations like this, i.e. the need of re-applying labels, because now there is no need for this - you suppress once in the suppressions file, and the suppression perists.

Can you please let me know why we decided to use the label here instead of suppressions file?

[msyyc]

In most time we will add the breaking items into suppressions.yaml but it will retrigger pipeline which cost more time. So sometimes we add approval label directly to unblock PR once we confirm the breakings are not caused by this PR and we will add the breaking items in other PRs.

[konrad-jamrozik]

@msyyc yes, but we had an agreement that each time when a label is added, the reviewer, who added the label, will add corresponding suppressions entry, either in the same PR, or a separate PR. I understand in this case this was not done, that's why we are applying the label again. We should never add the label again. If this happens, this means the process of updating suppressions file was not followed.

The experience of "don't worry about this label, it approves something from different PR", was exactly the reason why we introduced the suppression files in the first place. We have in-source suppressions to avoid confusion of form "this label approves something from somewhere else". But if we ignore the suppressions file and continue using labels, then it completely undermines having the suppressions files in the first place.