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

Adding new apis #14910

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 12, 2021
Merged

Adding new apis #14910

merged 5 commits into from
Jul 12, 2021

Conversation

MiriBerezin
Copy link
Contributor

@MiriBerezin MiriBerezin commented Jun 21, 2021

BulkCollectionsAction
QueryApprovedPlans

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

Changelog

Please ensure to add changelog with this PR by answering the following questions.

  1. What's the purpose of the update?
    • new service onboarding
    • new API version
    • [V] update existing version for new feature
    • update existing version to fix swagger quality issue in s360
    • Other, please clarify
  2. When you are targeting to deploy new service/feature to public regions? Please provide date, or month to public if date is not available yet.
  3. When you expect to publish swagger? Please provide date, or month to public if date is not available yet.
  4. If it's an update to existing version, please select SDKs of specific language and CLIs that require refresh after swagger is published.
    • [V] SDK of .NET (need service team to ensure code readiness)
    • SDK of Python
    • SDK of Java
    • SDK of Js
    • SDK of Go
    • PowerShell
    • CLI
    • Terraform
    • No, no need to refresh for updates in this PR

Contribution checklist:

If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.

ARM API Review Checklist

  • [V] Ensure to check this box if one of the following scenarios meet updates in the PR, so that label “WaitForARMFeedback” will be added automatically to involve ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs, all “removals” and “adding a new property” no more require ARM API review.

    • Adding new API(s)
    • Adding a new API version
    • Ensure to copy the existing version into new directory structure for first commit (including refactoring) and then push new changes including version updates in separate commits. This is required to review the changes efficiently.
    • Adding a new service
  • [V] Please ensure you've reviewed following guidelines including ARM resource provider contract and REST guidelines. Estimated time (4 hours). This is required before you can request review from ARM API Review board.

  • If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged with urgency, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.

Breaking Change Review Checklist

If there are following updates in the PR, ensure to request an approval from Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.

  • Removing API(s) in stable version
  • Removing properties in stable version
  • Removing API version(s) in stable version
  • Updating API in stable or public preview version with Breaking Change Validation errors
  • Updating API(s) in public preview over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)

Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.

Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.

BulkCollectionsAction
QueryApprovedPlans
@openapi-workflow-bot
Copy link

Hi, @MiriBerezin Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips.

  • Please ensure to do self-check against checklists in first PR comment.
  • PR assignee is the person auto-assigned and responsible for your current PR reviewing and merging.
  • For specs comparison cross API versions, Use API Specs Comparison Report Generator
  • If there is CI failure(s), to fix CI error(s) is mandatory for PR merging; or you need to provide justification in PR comment for explanation. How to fix?

  • Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. vsswagger@microsoft.com

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    [Call for Action] To better understand Azure service dev/test scenario, and support Azure service developer better on Swagger and REST API related tests in early phase, please help to fill in with this survey https://aka.ms/SurveyForEarlyPhase. It will take 5 to 10 minutes. If you already complete survey, please neglect this comment. Thanks.

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 21, 2021

    Swagger Validation Report

    ️❌BreakingChange: 2 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
    Rule Message
    1038 - AddedPath The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version.
    New: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L485:5
    1038 - AddedPath The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version.
    New: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L530:5
    ️⚠️LintDiff: 7 Warnings warning [Detail]
    The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
    Rule Message
    ⚠️ R1003 - ListInOperationName Since operation 'PrivateStore_BulkCollectionsAction' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L543
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'PrivateStoreModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'PrivateStore' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L498
    ⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'PrivateStoreModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'PrivateStore' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L543
    ⚠️ R3018 - EnumInsteadOfBoolean Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: allSubscriptions
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L2239
    ⚠️ R4000 - ParameterDescriptionRequired 'payload' parameter lacks 'description' property. Consider adding a 'description' element. Accurate description is essential for maintaining reference documentation.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L501
    ⚠️ R4000 - ParameterDescriptionRequired 'payload' parameter lacks 'description' property. Consider adding a 'description' element. Accurate description is essential for maintaining reference documentation.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L546
    ⚠️ R4021 - DescriptionAndTitleMissing 'details' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L2212


    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

    Only 10 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.

    Rule Message
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'PlanRequesterDetails' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L1660
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'OperationListResult' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L2354
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'display' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L2383
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'error' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L2427
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'Resource' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L2444
    ⚠️ R1003 - ListInOperationName Since operation 'PrivateStore_QueryOffers' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L165
    ⚠️ R1003 - ListInOperationName Since operation 'PrivateStore_BillingAccounts' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L201
    ⚠️ R1003 - ListInOperationName Since operation 'PrivateStoreCollection_TransferOffers' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L453
    ⚠️ R1003 - ListInOperationName Since operation 'PrivateStore_GetApprovalRequestsList' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L765
    ⚠️ R1003 - ListInOperationName Since operation 'PrivateStore_AdminRequestApprovalsList' response has model definition 'array', it should be of the form '_list'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change.
    Location: Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#L923
    ️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for Avocado.
    ️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for ModelValidation.
    ️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
    ️️✔️Cross-Version Breaking Changes succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There are no breaking changes.
    ️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There is no credential detected.
    ️⚠️[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation: 2 Warnings warning [Detail]
    The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
    Rule Message
    ⚠️ Modeler/MissingType "readme":"marketplace/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-composite-v2",
    "details":"The schema 'planDetails-requestDate' has no type or format information whatsoever. Location:\n file:///home/vsts/work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/marketplace/resource-manager/Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#/components/schemas/planDetails-requestDate"
    ⚠️ Modeler/MissingType "readme":"marketplace/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-2021-06-01",
    "details":"The schema 'planDetails-requestDate' has no type or format information whatsoever. Location:\n file:///home/vsts/work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/marketplace/resource-manager/Microsoft.Marketplace/stable/2021-06-01/Marketplace.json#/components/schemas/planDetails-requestDate"
    💬 AutorestCore/Exception "readme":"marketplace/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-composite-v2",
    "details":"> Installing AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0)"
    💬 AutorestCore/Exception "readme":"marketplace/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-composite-v2",
    "details":"> Installed AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0->1.8.0)"


    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

    |:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"marketplace/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-composite-v2",
    "details":"> Loading AutoRest extension '@autorest/modelerfour' (4.15.456->4.15.456)"|
    |:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"marketplace/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-2021-06-01",
    "details":"> Loading AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0->1.8.0)"|
    |:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"marketplace/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-2021-06-01",
    "details":"> Loading AutoRest extension '@autorest/modelerfour' (4.15.456->4.15.456)"|

    ️️✔️[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
    ️️✔️[Staging] SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for SpellCheck.
    ️️✔️[Staging] Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 21, 2021

    Swagger Generation Artifacts

    ️️✔️[Staging] ApiDocPreview succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
     Please click here to preview with your @microsoft account. 
    ️️✔️[Staging] SDK Breaking Change Tracking succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Breaking Changes Tracking

    ️❌ azure-sdk-for-net failed [Detail]
    • Failed [Logs]Release - Generate from 104815b. SDK Automation 14.0.0
      warn	Skip initScript due to not configured
      command	sudo apt-get install -y dotnet-sdk-5.0
      command	autorest --version=V2 --csharp --reflect-api-versions --license-header=MICROSOFT_MIT_NO_VERSION --use=@microsoft.azure/autorest.csharp@2.3.82 --csharp-sdks-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk ../azure-rest-api-specs/specification/marketplace/resource-manager/readme.md
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
      cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
    • Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      cmdout	[msbuild] /home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/ScenarioTests/PrivateStoreTests.cs(19,62): error CS0246: The type or namespace name 'MarketplaceManagementClient' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) [/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace.Tests.csproj]
      cmdout	[msbuild]      3>/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/ScenarioTests/PrivateStoreTests.cs(61,62): error CS0246: The type or namespace name 'MarketplaceManagementClient' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) [/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace.Tests.csproj]
      cmdout	[msbuild]      3>/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/ScenarioTests/PrivateStoreTests.cs(106,62): error CS0246: The type or namespace name 'MarketplaceManagementClient' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) [/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace.Tests.csproj]
      cmdout	[msbuild]          /home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/ScenarioTests/PrivateStoreTests.cs(19,62): error CS0246: The type or namespace name 'MarketplaceManagementClient' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) [/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace.Tests.csproj]
      cmdout	[msbuild]          /home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/ScenarioTests/PrivateStoreTests.cs(61,62): error CS0246: The type or namespace name 'MarketplaceManagementClient' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) [/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace.Tests.csproj]
      cmdout	[msbuild]          /home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/ScenarioTests/PrivateStoreTests.cs(106,62): error CS0246: The type or namespace name 'MarketplaceManagementClient' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) [/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk/marketplace/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace/tests/Microsoft.Azure.Management.Marketplace.Tests.csproj]
      error	Script return with result [failed] code [1] signal [null] cwd [azure-sdk-for-net]: dotnet
    ️⚠️ azure-resource-manager-schemas warning [Detail]
    • ⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from 104815b. Schema Automation 14.0.0
      command	.sdkauto/initScript.sh ../azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/initOutput.json
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] WARN old lockfile
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile The package-lock.json file was created with an old version of npm,
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile so supplemental metadata must be fetched from the registry.
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile This is a one-time fix-up, please be patient...
      cmderr	[initScript.sh] npm WARN old lockfile
      warn	File azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/initOutput.json not found to read
      command	.sdkauto/generateScript.sh ../azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-resource-manager-schemas_tmp/generateOutput.json
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:1954) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Error: ENOENT: no such file or directory, unlink '/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-resource-manager-schemas/schemas/2020-01-01/Microsoft.Marketplace.json'
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (Use `node --trace-warnings ...` to show where the warning was created)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:1954) UnhandledPromiseRejectionWarning: Unhandled promise rejection. This error originated either by throwing inside of an async function without a catch block, or by rejecting a promise which was not handled with .catch(). To terminate the node process on unhandled promise rejection, use the CLI flag `--unhandled-rejections=strict` (see https://nodejs.org/api/cli.html#cli_unhandled_rejections_mode). (rejection id: 1)
      cmderr	[generateScript.sh] (node:1954) [DEP0018] DeprecationWarning: Unhandled promise rejections are deprecated. In the future, promise rejections that are not handled will terminate the Node.js process with a non-zero exit code.
    • ️✔️marketplace [View full logs]  [Release Schema Changes]
    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    NewApiVersionRequired reason:

    A service’s API is a contract with customers and is represented by using the api-version query parameter. Changes such as adding an optional property to a request/response or introducing a new operation is a change to the service’s contract and therefore requires a new api-version value. This is critically important for documentation, client libraries, and customer support.

    EXAMPLE: if a customer calls a service in the public cloud using api-version=2020-07-27, the new property or operation may exist but if they call the service in a government cloud, air-gapped cloud, or Azure Stack Hub cloud using the same api-version, the property or operation may not exist. Because there is no clear relationship between the service api-version and the new property/operation, customers can’t trust the documentation and Azure customer have difficulty helping customers diagnose issues. In addition, each client library version documents the service version it supports. When an optional property or new operation is added to a service and its Swagger, new client libraries must be produced to expose this functionality to customers. Without updating the api-version, it is unclear to customers which version of a client library supports these new features.

    @jianyexi
    Copy link
    Contributor

    Hi, @MiriBerezin Miri Berezin FTE Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips.

    • Please ensure to do self-check against checklists in first PR comment.
    • PR assignee is the person auto-assigned and responsible for your current PR reviewing and merging.
    • For specs comparison cross API versions, Use API Specs Comparison Report Generator
    • If there is CI failure(s), to fix CI error(s) is mandatory for PR merging; or you need to provide justification in PR comment for explanation. How to fix?

    Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. vsswagger@microsoft.com

    @MiriBerezin please follow the tips in the comment

    @MiriBerezin
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    @jianyexi I posted a request for breaking changes.

    Can explain here as well: We are still in development mode and we need these two APIs.

    https://msazure.visualstudio.com/One/_workitems/edit/10195585

    Please let me know if there are further steps I need to take

    @gupele
    Copy link

    gupele commented Jun 24, 2021

    Do not merge, thanks

    @MiriBerezin
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    /azp run

    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

    @MiriBerezin
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    We are ready to merge after review. Thanks!

    @jianyexi jianyexi added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Jun 28, 2021
    @pilor
    Copy link
    Contributor

    pilor commented Jun 29, 2021

    Please go through and complete the checklist in the PR description

    @pilor pilor added the ARMChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when require changes after ARM review label Jun 29, 2021
    @MiriBerezin
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    @pilor, done

    @pilor
    Copy link
    Contributor

    pilor commented Jun 30, 2021

    2021-06-01 is not in the RP manifest so updates to this version are OK

    }
    }
    },
    "QueryApprovedPlansResponse": {
    Copy link
    Contributor

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    This will be easier to consume if its an array of plan objects with planId as a property in each object. Why does it need to be a dictionary with dynamic keys?

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    We want to enforce the plan id uniqueness in the result

    Copy link
    Contributor

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    You control the response so you can enforce uniqueness regardless of the response schema. If that is the only reason please use a strict schema instead of dynamic keys

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Fixed to list of objects

    }
    }
    },
    "/providers/Microsoft.Marketplace/privateStores/{privateStoreId}/bulkCollectionsAction": {
    Copy link
    Contributor

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Why does this need a bulk operation instead of performing the operation on each collection individually? Bulk operations are problematic because they may perform actions the user did not have RBAC rights to perform (since the operation is not performed directly on the scope it affects) and they don't expose in the activity log everything they are modifying. It also affects downstream notifications of changes, etc...

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Currently, we don't have RBAC per collection. It is on post Ni roadmap.
    Once we get there, we have 2 options ( on the RP side):

    1. Check RBAC for each collection and fail the action if there is a least one collection that is not authorized.
    2. Check RBAC for each collection and activate only for the allowed ones. In this case, the response will contain the details for the ones that passed and the ones that failed. The current response already supports this scenario.

    Copy link
    Contributor

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Can you clarify why a bulk operation is needed? RBAC is only one of the side effects mentioned above

    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    We have a business requirement to perform an action delete/enable/disable for all collections in a click.
    On the server side, we have a transaction(DB stored procedure) performing that operation. If we don't do that in bulk we get conflicts and high-performance impact and not acceptable latency.
    Thus the API must be a bulk operation.

    @pilor pilor added ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review and removed ARMChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when require changes after ARM review WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Jul 2, 2021
    @MiriBerezin
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    @jianyexi we got arm sign-off we would like to merge to master

    @ruowan
    Copy link
    Member

    ruowan commented Jul 12, 2021

    No deploy api-version 2021-06-01. Approve this breakingChange.

    @ruowan ruowan added the Approved-BreakingChange DO NOT USE! OBSOLETE label. See https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 label Jul 12, 2021
    @ruowan ruowan merged commit 104815b into Azure:master Jul 12, 2021
    mkarmark pushed a commit to mkarmark/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Jul 21, 2021
    * Adding new apis:
    BulkCollectionsAction
    QueryApprovedPlans
    
    * Fix queryApprovedOffers api
    
    * fix prettier check
    
    * Fix queryApprovedPlans API
    
    * Fix queryApprovedPlans response to list instead if disctionary
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Labels
    Approved-BreakingChange DO NOT USE! OBSOLETE label. See https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-tools/issues/6374 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.

    5 participants