-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
[KeyVault] - Address various architecture feedback #14997
Conversation
This pull request is protected by Check Enforcer. What is Check Enforcer?Check Enforcer helps ensure all pull requests are covered by at least one check-run (typically an Azure Pipeline). When all check-runs associated with this pull request pass then Check Enforcer itself will pass. Why am I getting this message?You are getting this message because Check Enforcer did not detect any check-runs being associated with this pull request within five minutes. This may indicate that your pull request is not covered by any pipelines and so Check Enforcer is correctly blocking the pull request being merged. What should I do now?If the check-enforcer check-run is not passing and all other check-runs associated with this PR are passing (excluding license-cla) then you could try telling Check Enforcer to evaluate your pull request again. You can do this by adding a comment to this pull request as follows: What if I am onboarding a new service?Often, new services do not have validation pipelines associated with them, in order to bootstrap pipelines for a new service, you can issue the following command as a pull request comment: |
8a9bb8d
to
77a8aa0
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Overall looks good. Just a minor nit.
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ export class CryptographyClient { | |||
/** | |||
* The ID of the key used to perform cryptographic operations for the client. | |||
*/ | |||
get keyId(): string | undefined { | |||
get keyID(): string | undefined { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It makes me a little sad that this is keyID
instead of keyId
, but it does make it consistent with the rest of the interfaces in this package (if inconsistent with the rest of the keyvault packages)
Co-authored-by: chradek <51000525+chradek@users.noreply.github.com>
f965a37
to
eb769fe
Compare
Adding 2020-09-Preview same as 11-preview (Azure#14997) * Adding 2020-09-Preview same as 11-preview * fixing lint issue * fixing model * fixing model * fixing model * pretify fix * fixing linting * more linting fix
What
Why
As part of pre-GA architecture feedback with @chradek we discovered a few things that we would want to address
before we GA the KeyVault packages in May. This PR is meant to collect all the various items and keep track of what
was changed.