-
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
Update costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json #23313
Conversation
Swagger Validation Report
|
compared swaggers (via Oad v0.10.4)] | new version | base version |
---|---|---|
common-types.json | 2022-10-01(15cabd0) | 2022-10-01(main) |
costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json | 2022-10-01(15cabd0) | 2022-10-01(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-2022-10 | package-2022-10(15cabd0) | package-2022-10(main) |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Rule | Message |
---|---|
ParametersOrder |
The parameters:operationId,scope should be kept in the same order as they present in the path. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L123 |
GetOperation200 |
The get operation should only return 200. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L157 |
LroLocationHeader |
A 202 response should include an Location response header. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L157 |
ParametersOrder |
The parameters:operationId,scope should be kept in the same order as they present in the path. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L170 |
MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'GenerateDetailedCostReportDefinition' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L224 |
MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'GenerateDetailedCostReportTimePeriod' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L257 |
MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'GenerateDetailedCostReportOperationStatuses' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L274 |
MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'GenerateDetailedCostReportOperationResult' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L312 |
MissingTypeObject |
The schema 'Status' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L334 |
OperationId should contain the verb: 'generatedetailedcostreport' in:'GenerateDetailedCostReport_CreateOperation'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L41 |
|
The x-ms-long-running-operation-options should be specified explicitly to indicate the type of response header to track the async operation. Location: Microsoft.CostManagement/stable/2022-10-01/costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json#L123 |
️️✔️
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]
️️✔️
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.
️️✔️
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.
️️✔️
TypeSpec Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for TypeSpec Validation.
️️✔️
PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Summary.
Hi, @jayati-tehri 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 Generation Artifacts
|
Generated ApiView
|
NewApiVersionRequired reason: |
Hi, @jayati-tehri your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board([email protected]). |
@@ -286,6 +286,14 @@ | |||
"description": "The status of the long running operation.", | |||
"$ref": "#/definitions/Status" | |||
}, | |||
"startTime": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There are a bunch of breaking changes reported on this PR, as a result, asking you to make these changes in NEW API Version. Please get a breaking changes approval from Azure Breaking Changes Reviewers [email protected] and ARM can review the changes afterwards. Once you have the approval, please remove the "ARMChangesRequested" label from the PR to make the PR visible to the ARM reviewers.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@visingla-ms We already have the startTime and endTime in response. It was just not in the documentation and hence flagged.
Please ensure to respond feedbacks from the ARM API reviewer. When you are ready to continue the ARM API review, please remove |
Hi @jayati-tehri, one or multiple breaking change(s) is detected in your PR. Please check out the breaking change(s), and provide business justification in the PR comment and @ PR assignee why you must have these change(s), and how external customer impact can be mitigated. Please ensure to follow breaking change policy to request breaking change review and approval before proceeding swagger PR review. |
@jayati-tehri You need to ask for a breaking change approval, otherwise the process cannot continue. You just need to explain to the reviewer. |
Hi @jayati-tehri, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
* Update costmanagement.generatedetailedcostreport.json * Fix in costmanagement common-types.json * Fixing example error code to Int in GenerateCostReport --------- Co-authored-by: Prathyusha Challa <[email protected]>
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.