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

[Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.Maps/Microsoft.Maps to add version preview/1.0 #14965

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 29, 2021

Conversation

chcmsft
Copy link
Contributor

@chcmsft chcmsft commented Jun 24, 2021

This is a PR generated at OpenAPI Hub. You can view your work branch via this link.

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
    • update existing version for new feature
    • update existing version to fix swagger quality issue in s360
    • Other, update the location url of the async batch apis for result downloading
  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.
    Target to release in July.
  3. When you expect to publish swagger? Please provide date, or month to public if date is not available yet.
    End of July.
  4. If it's an update to existing version, please select SDKs of specific language and CLIs that require refresh after swagger is published.
    • 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

  • 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
  • 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.

@openapi-workflow-bot
Copy link

Hi, @chcmsft 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-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 24, 2021

    Swagger Validation Report

    ️️✔️BreakingChange succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There are no breaking changes.

    ️❌LintDiff: 2 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
    The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
    Rule Message
    AutoRest exception "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"swagger-document/compose - FAILED"
    AutoRest exception "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Error: '$.securityDefinitions.azure_auth.description' has incompatible values (--->- These are the Azure Active Directory OAuth2 Flows. When paired with Azure Role Based Access control it can be used to control access to Azure Maps REST APIs. Azure Role based access controls are used to designate access to one or more Azure Maps resource account or sub-resources. Any user,
    group,
    or service principal can be granted access via a built in role or a custom role composed of one or"


    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

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

    Rule Message
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Feedback/preview/1.0/feedback.json#L216
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Mobility/preview/1.0/mobility.json#L1464
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Mobility/preview/1.0/mobility.json#L1491
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Route/preview/1.0/route.json#L1813
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Route/preview/1.0/route.json#L1855
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Route/preview/1.0/route.json#L1878
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Route/preview/1.0/route.json#L1969
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Search/preview/1.0/search.json#L2075
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Spatial/preview/1.0/spatial.json#L1094
    R2026 - AvoidAnonymousTypes Inline/anonymous models must not be used, instead define a schema with a model name in the 'definitions' section and refer to it. This allows operations to share the models.
    Location: Spatial/preview/1.0/spatial.json#L1117
    ️️✔️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 succeeded [Detail]
    The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:

    |:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"> Installing AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0)"|
    |:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"> Installed AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0->1.8.0)"|


    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

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

    Rule Message
    PreCheck/DuplicateSchema "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Duplicate Schema named ODataErrorResponse -- properties.error.$ref: undefined => "#/components/schemas/schemas:39" ; This error can be temporarily avoided by using the 'modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication' setting. NOTE: This setting will be removed in a future version of @autorest/modelerfour; schemas should be updated to fix this issue sooner than that."
    PreCheck/DuplicateSchema "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Duplicate Schema named ODataError -- properties.details.$ref: undefined => "#/components/schemas/schemas:42" ; This error can be temporarily avoided by using the 'modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication' setting. NOTE: This setting will be removed in a future version of @autorest/modelerfour; schemas should be updated to fix this issue sooner than that."
    PreCheck/DuplicateSchema "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Duplicate Schema named LongRunningOperationResult -- properties.error.$ref: undefined => "#/components/schemas/schemas:74",
    properties.warning.$ref: undefined => "#/components/schemas/schemas:74" ; This error can be temporarily avoided by using the 'modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication' setting. NOTE: This setting will be removed in a future version of @autorest/modelerfour; schemas should be updated to fix this issue sooner than that."
    PreCheck/DuplicateSchema "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Duplicate Schema named CoordinateAbbreviated -- properties.lat.$ref: undefined => "#/components/schemas/schemas:858",
    properties.lat.readOnly: undefined => true,
    properties.lon.$ref: undefined => "#/components/schemas/schemas:859",
    properties.lon.readOnly: undefined => true ; This error can be temporarily avoided by using the 'modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication' setting. NOTE: This setting will be removed in a future version of @autorest/modelerfour; schemas should be updated to fix this issue sooner than that."
    PreCheck/PropertyRedeclaration "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Schema 'Point' has a property 'type' that is conflicting with a property in the parent schema 'GeoJSONGeometry' differs more than just description : [x-ms-enum => '',
    enum => '']"
    PreCheck/PropertyRedeclaration "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Schema 'Polygon' has a property 'type' that is conflicting with a property in the parent schema 'GeoJSONGeometry' differs more than just description : [x-ms-enum => '',
    enum => '']"
    PreCheck/PropertyRedeclaration "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Schema 'LineString' has a property 'type' that is conflicting with a property in the parent schema 'GeoJSONGeometry' differs more than just description : [x-ms-enum => '',
    enum => '']"
    PreCheck/PropertyRedeclaration "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Schema 'MultiPoint' has a property 'type' that is conflicting with a property in the parent schema 'GeoJSONGeometry' differs more than just description : [x-ms-enum => '',
    enum => '']"
    PreCheck/PropertyRedeclaration "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Schema 'MultiPolygon' has a property 'type' that is conflicting with a property in the parent schema 'GeoJSONGeometry' differs more than just description : [x-ms-enum => '',
    enum => '']"
    PreCheck/PropertyRedeclaration "readme":"maps/data-plane/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-preview-2.0",
    "details":"Schema 'MultiLineString' has a property 'type' that is conflicting with a property in the parent schema 'GeoJSONGeometry' differs more than just description : [x-ms-enum => '',
    enum => '']"
    ️️✔️[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-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 24, 2021

    Swagger pipeline restarted successfully, please wait for status update in this comment.

    @chcmsft
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    chcmsft commented Jun 25, 2021

    @anuchandy Can we bypass the lintdiff error now because

    1. those error is not introduced by my change
    2. we have others to address those errors(also mentioned in this PR [Maps] Review request for to add version Render preview/2.1 #14625 (comment))

    Copy link
    Contributor

    @john35452 john35452 left a comment

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Looks good to me

    @lmazuel lmazuel merged commit 57e30b5 into Azure:master Jun 29, 2021
    @chcmsft
    Copy link
    Contributor Author

    chcmsft commented Jun 30, 2021

    @anuchandy @lmazuel
    Are there any way to revert the change on production?
    Our implementation isn't deployed to production yet.

    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