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

Microsoft.ContainerService API Version 2020-02-01 #8388

Merged

Conversation

gtxistxgao
Copy link
Contributor

@gtxistxgao gtxistxgao commented Feb 13, 2020

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 properties.
    • Added "Spot" option for ScaleSetPriority enum.
    • Added "SpotMaxPrice" property to support customize Spot Pool max price setting.
    • Added "networkMode" property for Network mode used for building Kubernetes network.
    • Added "autoScalerProfile" property to be applied to the cluster-autoscaler when enabled.
  • adding/removing API-version.
    • Added 2020-02-01 API Version

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.

Xiaofang Zhang and others added 6 commits February 7, 2020 18:37
* Spot Pool Change

* type has to be number

* ref example
* Add properties for networkMode

* rm the empty enum
* add autoScalerProfile to spec

* add example for put MC

* add to custom words

* add list of accepted params

* disable linting for profile

* update example
@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

1 similar comment
@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@openapi-sdkautomation
Copy link

openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Feb 13, 2020

azure-sdk-for-go - Release

⚠️ warning [Logs] [Expand Details]
  • ⚠️ Generate from fe24e32 with merge commit a737593. SDK Automation 13.0.17.20191226.1
  • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2017-07-01 [Logs
      No file is changed.
    • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2017-08-31 [Logs
        No file is changed.
      • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2017-09-30 [Logs
          No file is changed.
        • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2018-03-31 [Logs
            No file is changed.
          • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2019-02-01 [Logs
              No file is changed.
            • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2019-04-30 [Logs
                No file is changed.
              • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2019-06-01 [Logs
                  No file is changed.
                • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2019-08-01 [Logs
                    No file is changed.
                  • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2019-10-01 [Logs
                      No file is changed.
                    • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2019-11-01 [Logs
                        No file is changed.
                      • ⚠️containerservice/mgmt/2020-01-01 [Logs
                          No file is changed.
                        • ️✔️containerservice/mgmt/2020-02-01 [Logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
                        • ⚠️preview/containerservice/mgmt/2018-08-01-preview [Logs
                            No file is changed.
                          • ⚠️preview/containerservice/mgmt/2018-09-30-preview [Logs
                              No file is changed.
                            • ⚠️preview/containerservice/mgmt/2019-09-30-preview [Logs
                                No file is changed.

                              @openapi-sdkautomation
                              Copy link

                              openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Feb 13, 2020

                              azure-sdk-for-java - Release

                              ️✔️ succeeded [Logs] [Expand Details]

                              @openapi-sdkautomation
                              Copy link

                              openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Feb 13, 2020

                              azure-sdk-for-python - Release

                              ️✔️ succeeded [Logs] [Expand Details]
                              • ️✔️ Generate from fe24e32 with merge commit a737593. SDK Automation 13.0.17.20191226.1
                              • ️✔️azure-mgmt-containerservice [Logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
                                [after_scripts|python] WARNING:__main__:Found too much API version: {'2017-07-01', '2019-04-01'} in label v2017_07_01
                                [after_scripts|python] WARNING:__main__:Guessing you want 2017-07-01 based on label v2017_07_01
                                [build_package] /usr/lib/python3.6/distutils/dist.py:261: UserWarning: Unknown distribution option: 'long_description_content_type'
                                [build_package]   warnings.warn(msg)
                                [build_package] /usr/lib/python3.6/distutils/dist.py:261: UserWarning: Unknown distribution option: 'long_description_content_type'
                                [build_package]   warnings.warn(msg)

                              @openapi-sdkautomation
                              Copy link

                              openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Feb 13, 2020

                              azure-sdk-for-net - Release

                              ️✔️ succeeded [Logs] [Expand Details]

                              @openapi-sdkautomation
                              Copy link

                              openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Feb 13, 2020

                              azure-sdk-for-js - Release

                              ️✔️ succeeded [Logs] [Expand Details]
                              • ️✔️ Generate from fe24e32 with merge commit a737593. SDK Automation 13.0.17.20191226.1
                              • ️✔️@azure/arm-containerservice [Logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
                                [npmPack] npm WARN deprecated rollup-plugin-node-resolve@5.2.0: This package has been deprecated and is no longer maintained. Please use @rollup/plugin-node-resolve.
                                [npmPack] loaded rollup.config.js with warnings
                                [npmPack] (!) Unused external imports
                                [npmPack] default imported from external module 'rollup' but never used
                                [npmPack] 
                                [npmPack] ./esm/containerServiceClient.js → ./dist/arm-containerservice.js...
                                [npmPack] created ./dist/arm-containerservice.js in 481ms

                              @andyzhangx
                              Copy link
                              Contributor

                              @gtxistxgao could you give a detailed list about what's this version change compared to 2020-01-01? and also there is test failure.

                              @azure-pipelines
                              Copy link

                              Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

                              @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
                              {
                              Copy link
                              Contributor

                              Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

                              new parameters are added into a new file( AgentPoolsCreate_Spot.json) other than AgentPoolsCreate_Update.json, I am not sure whether this is the right way.
                              @zikalino could you take a look? Thanks.

                              Copy link
                              Contributor Author

                              Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

                              It's reviewed earlier. #8342

                              Copy link
                              Contributor

                              Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

                              this is just the example spec and its linked to here

                              Copy link
                              Contributor

                              @andyzhangx andyzhangx left a comment

                              Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

                              /lgtm

                              }
                              }
                              },
                              "x-ms-long-running-operation": true,
                              Copy link
                              Member

                              Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

                              just confirm, updating tag is long running operation either.

                              Copy link
                              Contributor Author

                              Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

                              It doesn't seems to be a long running operation. But this value is not related to the changes happens in this API version and is the same with previous version 2020-01-01 as it is copied automatically by OpenAPI.

                              @yungezz yungezz added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Feb 13, 2020
                              "description": "(PREVIEW) Whether to enable Kubernetes Pod security policy."
                              },
                              "networkProfile": {
                              "$ref": "#/definitions/
                              Copy link
                              Member

                              Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

                              scan-interval [](start = 13, length = 13)

                              I discussed this on another PR. Generally the naming convention is lowerCaseCamelCase for property names, but since these are passed through to a Kubernetes extension, I think there's value in keeping them as-is. Otherwise, the users will have to create a mental mapping between scanInterval becoming scan-interval and some for all others.

                              Copy link
                              Contributor

                              Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

                              Yup, for instance the Python SDK would show it as "scanInterval" in the GET MC response. But for serializing and deserializing, they'd do the conversion to/from "scan-interval" properly. I think it's a tradeoff here to achieve recognizable parameters.

                              @majastrz majastrz added ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review and removed WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Feb 13, 2020
                              Copy link
                              Member

                              @majastrz majastrz left a comment

                              Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

                              Signed off from ARM side.

                              @yungezz
                              Copy link
                              Member

                              yungezz commented Feb 14, 2020

                              HI @marwanad is the PR ready to merge? that means, service change is on Prod already. thanks.

                              @gtxistxgao
                              Copy link
                              Contributor Author

                              gtxistxgao commented Feb 14, 2020

                              HI @marwanad is the PR ready to merge? that means, service change is on Prod already. thanks.

                              @yungezz Yes. it's ready to merge. Server side code is ready and manifest has been released.

                              @yungezz yungezz merged commit a737593 into master Feb 14, 2020
                              ssripadham pushed a commit to ssripadham/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2020
                              00Kai0 pushed a commit to 00Kai0/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2020
                              @FumingZhang FumingZhang deleted the dev-containerservice-Microsoft.ContainerService-2020-02-01 branch February 26, 2024 05:33
                              Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
                              Labels
                              ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review
                              Projects
                              None yet
                              Development

                              Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

                              6 participants