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

Fixing responses for update management swagger #3095

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 21, 2018

Conversation

finiteattractor
Copy link
Contributor

@finiteattractor finiteattractor commented May 17, 2018

This fix will allow SDK to through proper exception so we can see correct error in PS Cmdlets.


This checklist is used to make sure that common issues in a pull request are addressed. This will expedite the process of getting your pull request merged and avoid extra work on your part to fix issues discovered during the review process.

PR information

  • The title of the PR is clear and informative.
  • There are a small number of commits, each of which have an informative message. This means that previously merged commits do not appear in the history of the PR. For information on cleaning up the commits in your pull request, see this page.
  • Except for special cases involving multiple contributors, the PR is started from a fork of the main repository, not a branch.
  • If applicable, the PR references the bug/issue that it fixes.
  • Swagger files are correctly named (e.g. the api-version in the path should match the api-version in the spec).

Quality of Swagger

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented May 17, 2018

Automation for azure-libraries-for-java

Nothing to generate for azure-libraries-for-java

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented May 17, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#1959

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented May 17, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-node#2653

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented May 17, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

Encountered a Subprocess error: (azure-sdk-for-go)

Command: ['/usr/local/bin/autorest', '/tmp/tmpn75pog5s/rest/specification/automation/resource-manager/readme.md', '--go', '--go-sdk-folder=/tmp/tmpn75pog5s/src/github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-go', '--multiapi', '--use=@microsoft.azure/autorest.go@~2.1.98', '--use-onever', '--verbose']
Finished with return code 1
and output:

AutoRest code generation utility [version: 2.0.4262; node: v7.10.1]
(C) 2018 Microsoft Corporation.
https://aka.ms/autorest
   Loading AutoRest core      '/root/.autorest/@microsoft.azure_autorest-core@2.0.4275/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core/dist' (2.0.4275)
   Loading AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/autorest.go' (~2.1.98->2.1.98)
   Loading AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/autorest.modeler' (2.3.38->2.3.38)
Processing batch task - {"tag":"package-2015-10"} .
Processing batch task - {"tag":"package-2017-05-preview"} .
Processing batch task - {"tag":"package-2018-01-preview"} .
FATAL: System.ArgumentOutOfRangeException: Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection.
Parameter name: startIndex
   at System.String.LastIndexOf(Char value, Int32 startIndex, Int32 count)
   at AutoRest.Go.Model.CodeModelGo.PackageVerDir() in /opt/vsts/work/1/s/src/Model/CodeModelGo.cs:line 64
   at AutoRest.Go.Model.CodeModelGo.get_DefaultUserAgent() in /opt/vsts/work/1/s/src/Model/CodeModelGo.cs:line 83
   at AutoRest.Go.Model.CodeModelGo.get_UserAgent() in /opt/vsts/work/1/s/src/Model/CodeModelGo.cs:line 31
   at AutoRest.Go.Templates.VersionTemplate.<ExecuteAsync>d__1.MoveNext() in /opt/vsts/work/1/s/src/obj/Razor/Templates/VersionTemplate.cshtml:line 28
--- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown ---
   at System.Runtime.ExceptionServices.ExceptionDispatchInfo.Throw()
   at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.TaskAwaiter.HandleNonSuccessAndDebuggerNotification(Task task)
   at AutoRest.Core.CodeGenerator.<Write>d__12.MoveNext()
--- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown ---
   at System.Runtime.ExceptionServices.ExceptionDispatchInfo.Throw()
   at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.TaskAwaiter.HandleNonSuccessAndDebuggerNotification(Task task)
   at AutoRest.Go.CodeGeneratorGo.<Generate>d__6.MoveNext() in /opt/vsts/work/1/s/src/CodeGeneratorGo.cs:line 91
--- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown ---
   at System.Runtime.ExceptionServices.ExceptionDispatchInfo.Throw()
   at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.TaskAwaiter.HandleNonSuccessAndDebuggerNotification(Task task)
   at AutoRest.Go.Program.<ProcessInternal>d__3.MoveNext() in /opt/vsts/work/1/s/src/Program.cs:line 107
--- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown ---
   at System.Runtime.ExceptionServices.ExceptionDispatchInfo.Throw()
   at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.TaskAwaiter.HandleNonSuccessAndDebuggerNotification(Task task)
   at NewPlugin.<Process>d__15.MoveNext()
FATAL: go/generate - FAILED
FATAL: Error: Plugin go reported failure.
Process() cancelled due to exception : Plugin go reported failure.
Failure during batch task - {"tag":"package-2018-01-preview"} -- Error: Plugin go reported failure..
  Error: Plugin go reported failure.

Copy link
Member

@anuchandy anuchandy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@finiteattractor looks good, as you already know this is breaking change in the SDKs as this cause exception to be propagated instead of SDK runtime handling it.

@finiteattractor
Copy link
Contributor Author

@anuchandy Thanks!, yes, this is the exact behavior we want.

mccleanp pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 23, 2022
Add common types for CheckNameAvailability, OperationStatus and Location
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.

3 participants