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

Add missing displayName and domains properties to response of Tenants_List call #6473

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 15, 2019

Conversation

cormacpayne
Copy link
Member

Description

Partial fix for issue #6468 -- the model object returned from the Tenants_List call in the subscriptions.json spec for ARM is missing a few properties (as outlined in the linked issue), and this change is adding two missing properties (displayName and domains) to this object in the latest stable API version for this spec.

CC: @Tiano2017 @ravbhatnagar -- would you mind taking a look at this change?

Latest improvements:

MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.

Contribution checklist:

  • I have reviewed the documentation for the workflow.
  • Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.
  • The OpenAPI Hub was used for checking validation status and next steps.

ARM API Review Checklist

  • Service team MUST add the "WaitForARMFeedback" label if the management plane API changes fall into one of the below categories.
  • adding/removing APIs.
  • adding/removing properties.
  • adding/removing API-version.
  • adding a new service in Azure.

Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs.

  • If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged urgently, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.
    Please follow the link to find more details on API review process.

@openapi-sdkautomation
Copy link

openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jun 26, 2019

SDK Automation [Logs] (Generated from 38bec71)

Failed Python: Azure/azure-sdk-for-python [Logs]
  • No packages generated.
Failed Java: Azure/azure-sdk-for-java [Logs] [Diff]
Failed Go: Azure/azure-sdk-for-go [Logs]
  • No packages generated.
Succeeded JavaScript: Azure/azure-sdk-for-js [Logs] [Diff]
  • No packages generated.

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jun 26, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-ruby

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-ruby

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jun 26, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#6155

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jun 26, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

A PR has been created for you based on this PR content.

Once this PR will be merged, content will be added to your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#5249

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jun 27, 2019

Automation for azure-sdk-for-java

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-java#3337

@cormacpayne
Copy link
Member Author

@zikalino @Tiano2017 @ravbhatnagar gentle ping 😀

@zikalino
Copy link

@cormacpayne looks good in general. just doing a few checks :-)

@zikalino
Copy link

zikalino commented Jun 28, 2019

@cormacpayne I have actually tried GET /tenants using api_version 2018-06-01, and I didn't get these properties, so I think I would like to verify what's the reason.

        "response": [
            {
                "id": "/tenants/xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx",
                "tenantId": "xxxxxxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx"
            }
        ],
        "url": "/tenants",```

@Tiano2017 @ravbhatnagar could you check that?

@Tiano2017
Copy link
Contributor

@zikalino I did it just now.. and could see "domains" in the response.

@zikalino
Copy link

zikalino commented Jul 3, 2019

@stankovski is it ok to merge?

@cormacpayne
Copy link
Member Author

@stankovski any update?

Copy link
Contributor

@chiragg4u chiragg4u left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks Cormac for these changes. :)

@cormacpayne
Copy link
Member Author

@zikalino @stankovski is this OK to merge?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants