-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.2k
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
[Cosmos DB] Fix CosmosDBMongo Source Sink #23191
[Cosmos DB] Fix CosmosDBMongo Source Sink #23191
Conversation
Hi, @ashwinisingh01 Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips. Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. [email protected] |
Swagger Validation Report
|
compared swaggers (via Oad v0.10.4)] | new version | base version |
---|---|---|
dataTransferService.json | 2023-03-01-preview(104bb8a) | 2023-03-01-preview(main) |
️️✔️
Breaking Change(Cross-Version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️️✔️
CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There is no credential detected.
️⚠️
LintDiff: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
compared tags (via openapi-validator v2.0.0) | new version | base version |
---|---|---|
package-preview-2023-03 | package-preview-2023-03(104bb8a) | package-preview-2023-03(main) |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Rule | Message |
---|---|
A PUT operation request body schema should be the same as its 200 response schema, to allow reusing the same entity between GET and PUT. If the schema of the PUT request body is a superset of the GET response body, make sure you have a PATCH operation to make the resource updatable. Operation: 'DataTransferJobs_Create' Request Model: 'parameters[5].schema' Response Model: 'responses[200].schema' Location: Microsoft.DocumentDB/preview/2023-03-01-preview/dataTransferService.json#L38 |
|
Parameter should have a description. Location: Microsoft.DocumentDB/preview/2023-03-01-preview/dataTransferService.json#L62 |
|
Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: CosmosDBDataTransferJobCreate Location: Microsoft.DocumentDB/preview/2023-03-01-preview/dataTransferService.json#L173 |
|
Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: CosmosDBDataTransferJobCreate Location: Microsoft.DocumentDB/preview/2023-03-01-preview/dataTransferService.json#L215 |
|
Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.DocumentDB/preview/2023-03-01-preview/dataTransferService.json#L469 |
️️✔️
Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️
ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️⚠️
~[Staging] ServiceAPIReadinessTest: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
API Test is not triggered due to precheck failure. Check pipeline log for details.
️️✔️
SwaggerAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️
CadlAPIView 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.
️️✔️
PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️
SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️
Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
️️✔️
CadlValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for CadlValidation.
️️✔️
PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Summary.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
Generated ApiView
|
Hi @ashwinisingh01, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
/azp run |
@XiaofeiCao , can you please merge this PR. Let me know if we need something else. Can you please help resolve the failing gates check |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
@mikekistler , can you confirm if adding a new enum value to existed version is breaking change? I don't see the breakingchangereviewrequired label was added automatically. I'm not sure if it's due to the enum is used as discriminator. |
Adding a new value to an enum (even an extensible enum) is not a breaking change but must be done in a new api-version. Similar to adding an optional property or parameter or adding a new operation. |
@mikekistler This is also a preview version, and was just very recently merged. While developing CLI/PS we noticed that this change is not present in this newly updated version and immediately updated it. There hasn't been any development on it, and this API version is also not publically released as well. So considering the circumstances, we think it'll be better to merge this in current API version itself. |
I see that the base version was merged just a week ago, so I suppose we can make an exception in this case. Please be more careful with PRs to main going forward. |
@XiaofeiCao, can you please help merge this PR |
* fix CosmosMongoSourceLink * address review comments * addresss review comments
ARM API Information (Control Plane)
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
Azure 1st Party Service can try out the Shift Left experience to initiate API design review from ADO code repo. If you are interested, may request engineering support by filling in with the form https://aka.ms/ShiftLeftSupportForm.
Changelog
Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:
Contribution checklist (MS Employees Only):
If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.
ARM API Review Checklist
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 the label "ARMReview" and "WaitForARMFeedback" will be added by bot to kick off ARM API Review. Missing to check this box in the following scenario may result in delays to the ARM manifest review and deployment.
-[ ] 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. You can use OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. For more details refer to the wiki.
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 you have any breaking changes as defined in the Breaking Change Policy, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board.
Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Additional details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking Change Wiki.
NOTE: To update API(s) in public preview for over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)
Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.