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

[Web PubSub] Add new API version for GA #15907

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Oct 4, 2021
Merged

[Web PubSub] Add new API version for GA #15907

merged 9 commits into from
Oct 4, 2021

Conversation

vicancy
Copy link
Member

@vicancy vicancy commented Sep 3, 2021

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

Changelog

Add a changelog entry for 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, please clarify
  2. When are you targeting to deploy the new service/feature to public regions? Please provide the date or, if the date is not yet available, the month.
  3. When do you expect to publish the swagger? Please provide date or, the the date is not yet available, the month.
  4. If updating an existing version, please select the specific langauge SDKs and CLIs that must be refreshed after the 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 refresh required 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

Applicability: ⚠️

If your changes encompass only the following scenarios, you should SKIP this section, as these scenarios do not require ARM review.

  • Change to data plane APIs
  • Adding new properties
  • All removals

Otherwise your PR may be subject to ARM review requirements. Complete the following:

  • Check this box if any of the following apply to the PR so that label “WaitForARMFeedback” will be added automatically to begin ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays to the manifest.

    • Adding a new service
    • Adding new API(s)
    • Adding a new API version
      -[ ] To review changes efficiently, ensure you copy the existing version into the new directory structure for first commit and then push new changes, including version updates, in separate commits.
  • 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 any of the following scenarios apply to the PR, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.

  • Removing API(s) in a stable version
  • Removing properties in a stable version
  • Removing API version(s) in a stable version
  • Updating API in a 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, @vicancy 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. [email protected]

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Sep 3, 2021

    Swagger Validation Report

    ️️✔️BreakingChange succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There are no breaking changes.
    ️⚠️LintDiff: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
    Rule Message
    ⚠️ R2007 - LongRunningOperationsWithLongRunningExtension The operation 'WebPubSub_SendToAll' returns 202 status code, which indicates a long running operation, please enable 'x-ms-long-running-operation.
    Location: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L181
    ⚠️ R2007 - LongRunningOperationsWithLongRunningExtension The operation 'WebPubSub_SendToConnection' returns 202 status code, which indicates a long running operation, please enable 'x-ms-long-running-operation.
    Location: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L376
    ⚠️ R2007 - LongRunningOperationsWithLongRunningExtension The operation 'WebPubSub_SendToGroup' returns 202 status code, which indicates a long running operation, please enable 'x-ms-long-running-operation.
    Location: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L583
    ⚠️ R2007 - LongRunningOperationsWithLongRunningExtension The operation 'WebPubSub_SendToUser' returns 202 status code, which indicates a long running operation, please enable 'x-ms-long-running-operation.
    Location: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L932
    ️️✔️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: 42 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
    The following breaking changes are detected by comparison with latest preview version:

    Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.

    Rule Message
    1007 - RemovedClientParameter The new version is missing a client parameter that was found in the old version. Was 'Endpoint' removed or renamed?
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L998:3
    1011 - AddingResponseCode The new version adds a response code '204'.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L356:11
    1011 - AddingResponseCode The new version adds a response code '204'.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L779:11
    1011 - AddingResponseCode The new version adds a response code '204'.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L1117:11
    1011 - AddingResponseCode The new version adds a response code '204'.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L1174:11
    1011 - AddingResponseCode The new version adds a response code '204'.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L1328:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L21:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L25:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L84:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L90:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L216:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L143:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L283:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L196:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L347:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L246:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L409:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L294:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L477:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L348:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L627:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L410:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L703:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L472:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L770:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L525:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L827:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L568:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L965:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L619:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L1041:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L681:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L1108:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L734:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L1165:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L777:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L1243:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L841:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L1319:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L903:11
    1025 - RequiredStatusChange The 'required' status changed from the old version('False') to the new version('True').
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L1395:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L965:11
    1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L21:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L25:11
    1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L84:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L90:11
    1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L216:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L143:11
    1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L283:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L196:11
    1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L347:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L246:11
    1027 - DefaultValueChanged The new version has a different default value than the previous one.
    New: WebPubSub/stable/2021-10-01/webpubsub.json#L409:11
    Old: WebPubSub/preview/2021-08-01-preview/webpubsub.json#L294:11
    ️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There is no credential detected.
    ️️✔️[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation

    ️️✔️[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 Sep 3, 2021

    Swagger Generation Artifacts

    ️⌛[Staging] ApiDocPreview pending [Detail]
    ️️✔️[Staging] SDK Breaking Change Tracking succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Breaking Changes Tracking

    ️⌛ azure-sdk-for-python pending [Detail]
    ️⌛ azure-sdk-for-net pending [Detail]
    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    Hi @vicancy, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of Avocado, semantic validation, model validation, breaking change, lintDiff.

    TaskHow to fixPrioritySupport (Microsoft alias)
    AvocadoFix-AvocadoHighruowan
    Semantic validationFix-SemanticValidation-ErrorHighraychen, jianyxi
    Model validationFix-ModelValidation-ErrorHighraychen,jianyxi
    LintDiffFix-LintDiffhighjianyxi, ruoxuan
    If you need further help, please feedback via swagger feedback."

    @vicancy
    Copy link
    Member Author

    vicancy commented Sep 6, 2021

    Hi @jhendrixMSFT, could you help review? As confirmed by the API team, the cross-version failure is false alarm. And the track2 net failure is not blocking swagger update.

    @jhendrixMSFT
    Copy link
    Member

    @vicancy has this been reviewed and approved by the arch board?

    @vicancy
    Copy link
    Member Author

    vicancy commented Sep 8, 2021

    Hi @jhendrixMSFT I am a little lost about the process of adding a new API to the swagger, shall I go through the arch board when adding a new API 40a3903#diff-dda68e9b97ba5dba6c96a7545d555adf12d08fa5a2a7b54674447a5399b8bb40R638? Could you refer me to the process document if any?

    @vicancy vicancy force-pushed the vicancy-patch-1 branch 2 times, most recently from 1e4b76b to 40a3903 Compare September 9, 2021 04:29
    @jhendrixMSFT jhendrixMSFT added the APIStewardshipBoard-ReviewRequested This should be reviewed by the Azure API Stewardship team in partnership with the service team. label Sep 9, 2021
    @jhendrixMSFT
    Copy link
    Member

    @markweitzel can you help get the API review going?

    @markweitzel markweitzel changed the title Add new API version for Web PubSub [ Web PubSub ] Add new API version Sep 10, 2021
    @markweitzel markweitzel linked an issue Sep 10, 2021 that may be closed by this pull request
    @markweitzel markweitzel changed the title [ Web PubSub ] Add new API version [Web PubSub] Add new API version Sep 10, 2021
    @vicancy vicancy changed the title [Web PubSub] Add new API version [Web PubSub] Add new API version for GA Sep 14, 2021
    Copy link
    Member

    @markweitzel markweitzel left a comment

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    The new APIs look good. There are a few questions that I've added as well that we can look at. Also, there is some general cleanup that should be performed on the OpenAPI document that will improve the overall quality of the documentation and downstream code.

    },
    "default": {
    "description": "Error response",
    "x-ms-error-response": true
    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Is there a schema for your errors? There is an error structure defined in the Azure REST Guidelines. Is this the structure you are using? If it is, then it should be documented, if not, then you should document what schema you are using and be consistent.

    Copy link
    Member Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Thanks, looks cool, will follow

    Copy link
    Member Author

    @vicancy vicancy Sep 22, 2021

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Question: there could be error responses returned earlier when a client calls the REST API, for example, when the load balancer returns 502. In such case, the response body would probably be some plain-text body. Will that break the client if the default response only defines the ErrorDetail response?

    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    @vicancy - If I'm understanding this correctly, this would be an error that happens BEFORE the service is involved--e.g. the request never gets to the service. If this is accurate, then we should not worry about modeling this in the swagger document. We should focus on the errors that the service throws and work to be consistent there. I'll also check with our SDK team that our libraries are resilient in this scenario.

    Copy link
    Member Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Thanks for the effort Mark. Yeah my only concern is if our SDK clients can handle this without error. Anyway, updated the swagger.

    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Great! Thank you!

    }
    ],
    "responses": {
    "202": {
    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    This looks like a long running operation, but appears to missing the operation-location header. Also the guidelines for LROs have been updated with more clarity. See: REST Guidelines and Considerations for Service Design

    Copy link
    Member Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    It is a fire-and-forget pattern instead of a long-running operation.

    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    @vicancy -- If I'm understanding this API correctly, this is the operation that will publish the message to the subscribers. It makes sense where this would be 'fire and forget,' but is there any scenario where the client would need to understand or reason about if the :send completed successfully, is in progress, etc?

    Copy link
    Member Author

    @vicancy vicancy Sep 27, 2021

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    It is a pub/sub pattern. 202 means the message is successfully published to the channel, but since the service don't know whether all the subscribers successfully receive the messages (which requires some ack mechanism from the subscriber which we don't support and don't want to support in this send API) I think 202 makes more sense than 200

    Copy link
    Member

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    @vicancy -- In this case, we would still recommend a 202, but you do not include the operation-location header. The 202 is the mechanism the service would use to indicate that it will do its best to deliver the message. That is, it has Accepted the message to deliver. A 200 would imply that the message has been delivered.

    Copy link
    Member Author

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Yes, we will not include operation-location header.

    @vicancy
    Copy link
    Member Author

    vicancy commented Sep 24, 2021

    Hi @markweitzel and @johanste , the PR is updated, please help to take a look and let me know your concerns if any.

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Sep 27, 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-python warning [Detail]
    • ⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from 39c7d63. SDK Automation 14.0.0
      command	sh scripts/automation_init.sh ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/initOutput.json
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] ERROR: pip's dependency resolver does not currently take into account all the packages that are installed. This behaviour is the source of the following dependency conflicts.
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] azure-mgmt-core 1.3.0 requires azure-core<2.0.0,>=1.15.0, but you have azure-core 1.6.0 which is incompatible.
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] ERROR: pip's dependency resolver does not currently take into account all the packages that are installed. This behaviour is the source of the following dependency conflicts.
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] azure-mgmt-core 1.3.0 requires azure-core<2.0.0,>=1.15.0, but you have azure-core 1.6.0 which is incompatible.
      cmderr	[automation_init.sh] WARNING: Skipping azure-nspkg as it is not installed.
      command	sh scripts/automation_generate.sh ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/generateOutput.json
    • ️✔️azure-messaging-webpubsubservice [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      info	[Changelog] data-plan skip changelog generation temporarily
    ️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-net succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    • ️✔️Succeeded [Logs]Release - Generate from 39c7d63. 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 [email protected]/[email protected] --csharp-sdks-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk ../azure-rest-api-specs/specification/webpubsub/data-plane/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
    • ️✔️Azure.Messaging.WebPubSub [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]
      warn	Skip artifact folder because it doesn't exist: artifacts/packages
    ️❌ azure-sdk-for-net-track2 failed [Detail]
    • Failed [Logs]Release - Generate from 39c7d63. SDK Automation 14.0.0
      command	pwsh ./eng/scripts/Automation-Sdk-Init.ps1 ../azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/initOutput.json
      warn	File azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/initOutput.json not found to read
      command	pwsh ./eng/scripts/Automation-Sdk-Generate.ps1 ../azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/generateOutput.json
      warn	No file changes detected after generation
      error	Fatal error: packageFolderFromFileSearch not configured and could not be found in legacy config
      packageFolderFromFileSearch not configured and could not be found in legacy config
      Error: packageFolderFromFileSearch not configured and could not be found in legacy config
          at workflowDetectChangedPackages (/home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/automation/workflow.js:422:23)
          at workflowHandleReadmeMd (/home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/automation/workflow.js:168:11)
          at async Object.exports.workflowMain (/home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/automation/workflow.js:83:9)
          at async Object.exports.sdkAutoMain (/home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/automation/entrypoint.js:152:13)
          at async /home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/cli/cli.js:20:18
    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    Copy link
    Member

    @markweitzel markweitzel left a comment

    Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

    Per the scope of #15996 this looks good!
    Per the API Stewardship a second sign-off is required (currently assigned to @johanste )

    @vicancy
    Copy link
    Member Author

    vicancy commented Oct 7, 2021

    Hi @jhendrixMSFT just noticed that the PR is merged, however, our service hasn't yet supported this stable version yet, shall we revert the merged PR and keep it open until the service GA (Nov. 11th)?

    @vicancy vicancy restored the vicancy-patch-1 branch October 8, 2021 00:15
    vicancy added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2021
    @vicancy
    Copy link
    Member Author

    vicancy commented Oct 13, 2021

    As offline discussed, since GA date is coming, we keep the stable version in the repo

    @vicancy vicancy deleted the vicancy-patch-1 branch October 13, 2021 08:02
    jovannikolov-msft pushed a commit to jovannikolov-msft/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Dec 1, 2021
    * Add stable version
    
    * update path
    
    * Update naming
    
    * Update webpubsub.json
    
    * Change DELETE back to 200 
    
    Since it is a breaking change
    
    * Update webpubsub.json
    
    * We don't expect health check to return error body
    
    * Update to use 204 for all delete
    
    * Update webpubsub.json
    LeiWang3 pushed a commit to LeiWang3/azure-rest-api-specs that referenced this pull request Mar 31, 2022
    * Add stable version
    
    * update path
    
    * Update naming
    
    * Update webpubsub.json
    
    * Change DELETE back to 200 
    
    Since it is a breaking change
    
    * Update webpubsub.json
    
    * We don't expect health check to return error body
    
    * Update to use 204 for all delete
    
    * Update webpubsub.json
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Labels
    APIStewardshipBoard-ReviewRequested This should be reviewed by the Azure API Stewardship team in partnership with the service team.
    Projects
    None yet
    Development

    Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

    [Web PubSub] API Review
    4 participants