Review request for Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger to add version preview/2024-01-26 #27564
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…iew/2023-01-18-preview to version 2024-01-26-preview
Next Steps to Merge✅ All automated merging requirements have been met! To get your PR merged, see aka.ms/azsdk/specreview/merge. |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Compared specs (v0.10.7) | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| common.json | 2024-01-26-preview(05b3913) | 2022-05-13(main) |
| common.json | 2024-01-26-preview(05b3913) | 2023-01-18-preview(main) |
| confidentialledger.json | 2024-01-26-preview(05b3913) | 2023-01-18-preview(main) |
| identityservice.json | 2024-01-26-preview(05b3913) | 2022-05-13(main) |
| identityservice.json | 2024-01-26-preview(05b3913) | 2023-01-18-preview(main) |
The following breaking changes are detected by comparison with the latest stable version:
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
"new":"https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/05b3913210acf132c99d1866e9febf4c522da9ef/specification/confidentialledger/data-plane/Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger/preview/2024-01-26-preview/confidentialledger.json", "old":"https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/main/specification/confidentialledger/data-plane/Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger/stable/2022-05-13/confidentialledger.json", "details":"Command failed: dotnet "/mnt/vss/_work/_tasks/AzureApiValidation_5654d05d-82c1-48da-ad8f-161b817f6d41/0.0.96/common/temp/node_modules/.pnpm/@Azure[email protected]/node_modules/@azure/oad/dlls/OpenApiDiff.dll" -o /tmp/oad-LmZNYK/old-resolved.json -n /tmp/oad-LRqxhN/new-resolved.json\nUnhandled exception. Newtonsoft.Json.JsonReaderException: JSON integer 9223372036854776000 is too large or small for an Int64. Path 'parameters.CommitParameter.maximum', line 1, position 40197.\n at Newtonsoft.Json.JsonTextReader.ParseNumber(ReadType readType)\n at Newtonsoft.Json.JsonTextReader.ParseValue()\n at Newtonsoft.Json.Linq.JContainer.ReadContentFrom(JsonReader r, JsonLoadSettings settings)\n at Newtonsoft.Json.Linq.JContainer.ReadTokenFrom(JsonReader reader, JsonLoadSettings options)\n at Newtonsoft.Json.Linq.JObject.Load(JsonReader reader, JsonLoadSettings settings)\n at Newtonsoft.Json.Linq.JObject.Parse(String json, JsonLoadSettings settings)\n at Newtonsoft.Json.Linq.JObject.Parse(String json)\n at AutoRest.Swagge" |
️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️⚠️LintDiff: 94 Warnings warning [Detail]
| Compared specs (v2.2.0) | new version | base version |
|---|---|---|
| package-2024-01-26-preview-ledger | package-2024-01-26-preview-ledger(05b3913) | default(main) |
| package-2024-01-26-preview-identity | package-2024-01-26-preview-identity(05b3913) | default(main) |
[must fix]The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| OperationId should be of the form 'Noun_Verb' Location: Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger/preview/2024-01-26-preview/identityservice.json#L34 |
|
| Path parameter should specify a maximum length (maxLength) and characters allowed (pattern). Location: Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger/preview/2024-01-26-preview/identityservice.json#L45 |
|
| Error response should contain a x-ms-error-code header. Location: Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger/preview/2024-01-26-preview/identityservice.json#L60 |
|
Error schema should define code and message properties as required.Location: Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger/preview/2024-01-26-preview/identityservice.json#L62 |
|
The error property in the error response schema should be required.Location: Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger/preview/2024-01-26-preview/identityservice.json#L62 |
️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️SwaggerAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️TypeSpecAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️PoliCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passed for PoliCheck.
️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
️️✔️PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Summary.
️️✔️Automated merging requirements met succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
Generated ApiView
|
|
Hi @taicchoumsft! For review efficiency consideration, when creating a new API version, it is required to place API specs of the base version in the first commit, and push new version updates into successive commits. You can use OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. |
taicchoumsft
requested review from
DominikMe and
johanste
and removed request for
a team
microsoft-github-policy-service
bot
added
no-recent-activity
microsoft-github-policy-service
bot
added
the
no-recent-activity
taicchoumsft
removed
the
no-recent-activity
mikekistler
added
the
APIStewardshipBoard-SignedOff
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
|
The required check Breaking Change(Cross-Version) is failing due to changes that are not related to this new API version (see details). Given that the #21659 also had the same detected breaking changes and was eventually approved, I've added the BreakingChange-Approved-Previously label. |
taicchoumsft
added
the
BreakingChange-Approved-Previously
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
|
@DominikMe , @johanste , can we request for a review on this PR? Is there anything we need to do to move this along? Thanks in advance! |
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
|
/pr RequestMerge |
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
johanste
reviewed
Apr 19, 2024
...r/data-plane/Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger/preview/2024-01-26-preview/confidentialledger.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
johanste
approved these changes
Apr 19, 2024
…tialLedger/preview/2024-01-26-preview/confidentialledger.json Remove trailing slash Co-authored-by: Johan Stenberg (MSFT) <[email protected]>
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
johanste
approved these changes
Apr 19, 2024
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
…nfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
ramoka178
deleted the
taicchoumsft-confidentialledger-Microsoft.ConfidentialLedger-2023-01-18-preview
branch
3 tasks
Merged
3 tasks
mpodwysocki
pushed a commit
to Azure/azure-sdk-for-js
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 13, 2024
…31987) ### Packages impacted by this PR @azure-rest/confidential-ledger ### Issues associated with this PR Add a single API - the ability to *list* users from the "app/users" endpoint. Please see the [doc](https://microsoft-my.sharepoint-df.com/:w:/g/personal/tachou_microsoft_com1/EVUirfTSrlhJslGy0i_eCOgBP_wb0gDTlBZOBynm5wWoCw?e=oaZcv4) here. ### Describe the problem that is addressed by this PR Customers can `GET` details of a user from the `app/users/{userId}` endpoint, but needed to know the `userId` beforehand. The API was amended in `preview-2024-01-26` to include the ability to list all users from the `app/users` endpoint. ### What are the possible designs available to address the problem? If there are more than one possible design, why was the one in this PR chosen? ### Are there test cases added in this PR? _(If not, why?)_ Yes ### Provide a list of related PRs _(if any)_ [Spec API Change](Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#27564) ### Command used to generate this PR:**_(Applicable only to SDK release request PRs)_ ### Checklists - [X] Added impacted package name to the issue description - [ ] Does this PR needs any fixes in the SDK Generator?** _(If so, create an Issue in the [Autorest/typescript](https://github.com/Azure/autorest.typescript) repository and link it here)_ - [X] Added a changelog (if necessary)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Data Plane API - Pull Request
Confidential Ledger is adding a new API to list users. A new preview API (2024-01-26-preview) is added, and a new API to list users
API Info: The Basics
Most of the information about your service should be captured in the issue that serves as your API Spec engagement record.
Is this review for (select one):
Change Scope
This section will help us focus on the specific parts of your API that are new or have been modified.
Please share a link to the design document for the new APIs, a link to the previous API Spec document (if applicable), and the root paths that have been updated.
Viewing API changes
For convenient view of the API changes made by this PR, refer to the URLs provided in the table
in the
Generated ApiViewcomment added to this PR. You can use ApiView to show API versions diff.Suppressing failures
If one or multiple validation error/warning suppression(s) is detected in your PR, please follow the
Swagger-Suppression-Process
to get approval.
❔Got questions? Need additional info?? We are here to help!
Contact us!
The Azure API Review Board is dedicated to helping you create amazing APIs. You can read about our mission and learn more about our process on our wiki.
Click here for links to tools, specs, guidelines & other good stuff
Tooling
Guidelines & Specifications
Helpful Links
Checks stuck in `queued` state?
If the PR CI checks appear to be stuck in `queued` state, please add a comment with contents `/azp run`. This should result in a new comment denoting a `PR validation pipeline` has started and the checks should be updated after few minutes.fix #28064