[DataFactory]Add Some SHIR Features In DataFatory

[Jingshu918]

ARM (Control Plane) API Specification Update Pull Request

PR review workflow diagram

Please understand this diagram before proceeding. It explains how to get your PR approved & merged.

[1] public repo review queue, private repo review queue
The PRs are processed by time opened, ascending. Your PR may show up on 2nd or later page.
If you addressed Step 1 from the diagram and your PR is not showing up in the queue, ensure the label ARMChangesRequested
is removed from your PR. This should cause the label WaitForARMFeedback to be added.
[2] https://aka.ms/azsdk/support/specreview-channel
[3] List of SDK breaking changes approvers in pinned Teams announcement
[4] public repo merge queue, private repo merge queue

If you need further help with anything, see Getting help section below.

Purpose of this PR

What's the purpose of this PR? Check all that apply. This is mandatory!

• New API version. (Such PR should have been generated with OpenAPI Hub, per this wiki doc.)
• Update existing version for a new feature. (This is applicable only when you are revising a private preview API version.)
• Update existing version to fix swagger quality issues in S360.
• Other, please clarify:
  • edit this with your clarification

Due diligence checklist

To merge this PR, you must go through the following checklist and confirm you understood
and followed the instructions by checking all the boxes:

• I confirm this PR is modifying Azure Resource Manager (ARM) related specifications, and not data plane related specifications.
• I have reviewed following Resource Provider guidelines, including
  ARM resource provider contract and
  REST guidelines (estimated time: 4 hours).
  I understand this is required before I can proceed to Step 2, "ARM Review", for this PR.

Breaking changes review (Step 1)

• If the automation determines you have breaking changes, i.e. Step 1 from the diagram applies to you,
  you must follow the breaking changes process.
  IMPORTANT This applies even if:
  • The tool fails while it shouldn't, e.g. due to runtime exception, or incorrect detection of breaking changes.
  • You believe there is no need for you to request breaking change approval, for any reason.
    Such claims must be reviewed, and the process is the same.

ARM API changes review (Step 2)

• If this PR is in purview of ARM review then automation will add the ARMReview label.
• If you want to force ARM review, add the label yourself.
• Proceed according to the diagram at the top of this comment.

Getting help

• For general PR approval workflow, see the diagram at the top of this comment.
• For guidance on fixing this PR CI check failures, see the hyperlinks provided in given failure
  and https://aka.ms/ci-fix.
• If the help provided by the previous points is not enough, post to https://aka.ms/azsdk/support/specreview-channel and link to this PR.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Swagger Validation Report

️❌BreakingChange: 4 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]

compared swaggers (via Oad v0.10.4)]	new version	base version
IntegrationRuntime.json	2018-06-01(f926988)	2018-06-01(main)

Rule	Message
❌ 1045 - AddedOptionalProperty	The new version has a new optional property 'numberOfPipelineNodes' that was not found in the old version. New: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L220:7 Old: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L220:7
❌ 1045 - AddedOptionalProperty	The new version has a new optional property 'numberOfExternalNodes' that was not found in the old version. New: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L220:7 Old: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L220:7
❌ 1045 - AddedOptionalProperty	The new version has a new optional property 'selfContainedInteractiveAuthoringEnabled' that was not found in the old version. New: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L646:7 Old: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L632:7
❌ 1045 - AddedOptionalProperty	The new version has a new optional property 'selfContainedInteractiveAuthoringEnabled' that was not found in the old version. New: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L1019:7 Old: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L1001:7

️️✔️Breaking Change(Cross-Version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There is no credential detected.

️⚠️LintDiff: 2 Warnings warning [Detail]

compared tags (via openapi-validator v2.1.4)	new version	base version
package-2018-06	package-2018-06(f926988)	package-2018-06(main)

[must fix]The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:

Rule	Message	Related RPC [For API reviewers]
⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L650
⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L1129

The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

Rule	Message
⚠️ LocationMustHaveXmsMutability	Property location must have 'x-ms-mutability':['read', 'create'] extension defined. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L104
⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L169
⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L1290
⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L1339
⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L1644
⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L1648
⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L1668
⚠️ EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans properties are not descriptive in all cases and can make them to use, evaluate whether is makes sense to keep the property as boolean or turn it into an enum. Location: stable/2018-06-01/entityTypes/IntegrationRuntime.json#L1699

️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for Avocado.

️❌SwaggerAPIView: 0 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]

️️✔️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).

️️✔️PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for Summary.

️️✔️Automated merging requirements met succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

_{Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?}

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Swagger Generation Artifacts

️️✔️ApiDocPreview succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

️❌SDK Breaking Change Tracking failed [Detail]

Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-net-track2 succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-python-track2 warning [Detail]

Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-java warning [Detail]

Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-go succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-js succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

️️✔️ azure-resource-manager-schemas succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

️❌ azure-powershell failed [Detail]

Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

_{Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?}

[openapi-workflow-bot]

Hi @Jingshu918, this service has enabled Service API Toolset. All spec updates MUST be initiated from service ADO project repo, so that to guarantee it to be the source of truth., please review this pull request if it's intentional or reject it if it's not expected. Normally, all the specification or example changes should start with PR created in ADO.

You can refer to Service API Toolset Introduction for details.

Please contact service focal contacts or Service API Toolset Support Channel if need further help.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Generated ApiView

Language	Package Name	ApiView Link
Go	sdk/resourcemanager/datafactory/armdatafactory	Create ApiView failed. Please ensure your github account in Azure/Microsoft is public and add a comment "/azp run" to re-trigger the CI.
Java	azure-resourcemanager-datafactory	Create ApiView failed. Please ensure your github account in Azure/Microsoft is public and add a comment "/azp run" to re-trigger the CI.
JavaScript	@azure/arm-datafactory	Create ApiView failed. Please ensure your github account in Azure/Microsoft is public and add a comment "/azp run" to re-trigger the CI.
.Net	Azure.ResourceManager.DataFactory	Create ApiView failed. Please ensure your github account in Azure/Microsoft is public and add a comment "/azp run" to re-trigger the CI.

[openapi-workflow-bot]

Hi, @Jingshu918! Thank you for your pull request. To help get your PR merged:

Ensure you reviewed the checklists in the PR description.

Know that PR assignee is the person auto-assigned and responsible for your current PR review and approval.

For convenient view of the API changes made by this PR, refer to the URLs provided in the table in the Generated ApiView comment added to this PR. You can use ApiView to show API versions diff.

[microsoft-github-policy-service]

Thank you for your contribution Jingshu918! We will review the pull request and get back to you soon.

[openapi-workflow-bot]

Please address or respond to feedback from the ARM API reviewer.
When you are ready to continue the ARM API review, please remove the ARMChangesRequested label.
This will notify the reviewer to have another look.
If the feedback provided needs further discussion, please use this Teams channel to post your questions - aka.ms/azsdk/support/specreview-channel.
Please include [ARM Query] in the title of your question to indicate that it is ARM-related.

[openapi-workflow-bot]

Hi @Jingshu918! The automation detected this pull request introduces changes to at least one existing API version that violate Azure's versioning policy. To comply with the policy, these changes must be made in a new API version. As a result, the automation added the NewApiVersionRequired label.

You cannot proceed with merging this PR until you complete one of the following action items:

ACTION ITEM ALTERNATIVE A: Introduce a new API version.
Submit a new PR instead of this one, or modify this PR, so that it adds a new API version instead of introducing changes to existing API versions.

ACTION ITEM ALTERNATIVE B: Request approval.
Alternatively, if you cannot avoid modifying existing API versions, then you can request an approval for them. Please follow the breaking changes process.
This case applies even if:

• The tool fails while it shouldn't, e.g. due to runtime exception, or incorrect detection of breaking changes.
• You believe there is no need for you to request breaking change approval, for any reason. Such claims must be reviewed, and the process is the same.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Automatic PR validation started. This comment will be populated with next steps to merge this PR once validation is completed. Please wait ⌛.

[Jingshu918]

@raych1 @msyyc @qiaozha Please help review SDK breaking change.

[kazrael2119]

this js sdk breaking is not caused by this pr

[msyyc]

Python SDK breaking is not caused by this PR

[Jingshu918]

/pr RequestMerge

[sjanamma]

@Jingshu918 - Please remove DoNotMerge tag, in order for this PR to be merged by the ARM API reviewers' team.

[sjanamma]

@Jingshu918 - Please get the PR approved by one of the required approvers.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

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