[Automation] Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version #2690

vrdmr · 2018-03-19T07:28:27Z

Added spec for new 2018-01 APIs. These mainly contain spec for the DSC APIs fixing the linting issues. Also added examples, and did some housekeeping for cleaning up the existing specs and better naming things.

This checklist is used to make sure that common issues in a pull request are addressed. This will expedite the process of getting your pull request merged and avoid extra work on your part to fix issues discovered during the review process.

PR information

The title of the PR is clear and informative.
There are a small number of commits, each of which have an informative message. This means that previously merged commits do not appear in the history of the PR. For information on cleaning up the commits in your pull request, see this page.
Except for special cases involving multiple contributors, the PR is started from a fork of the main repository, not a branch.
If applicable, the PR references the bug/issue that it fixes.
Swagger files are correctly named (e.g. the api-version in the path should match the api-version in the spec).

Quality of Swagger

I have read the contribution guidelines.
My spec meets the review criteria:
- The spec conforms to the Swagger 2.0 specification.
- The spec follows the guidelines described in the Swagger checklist document.
- Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.

AutorestCI · 2018-03-19T07:30:07Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

A PR has been created for you:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-node#2492

AutorestCI · 2018-03-19T07:30:30Z

Automation for azure-libraries-for-java

Nothing to generate for azure-libraries-for-java

AutorestCI · 2018-03-19T07:31:26Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

A PR has been created for you based on this PR content.

Once this PR will be merged, content will be added to your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#1959

AutorestCI · 2018-03-19T07:31:56Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

Encountered a Subprocess error: (azure-sdk-for-go)

Command: ['/usr/local/bin/autorest', '/tmp/tmple9pthre/rest/specification/automation/resource-manager/readme.md', '--go', '--go-sdk-folder=/tmp/tmple9pthre/sdk', '--multiapi', '[email protected]/autorest.go@~2.1.95', '--use-onever', '--verbose']
Finished with return code 1
and output:

AutoRest code generation utility [version: 2.0.4259; node: v7.10.1]
(C) 2018 Microsoft Corporation.
https://aka.ms/autorest
   Loading AutoRest core      '/tmp/.autorest/@[email protected]/node_modules/@microsoft.azure/autorest-core/dist' (2.0.4259)
   Loading AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/autorest.go' (~2.1.95->2.1.95)
   Loading AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/autorest.modeler' (2.3.38->2.3.38)
Processing batch task - {"tag":"package-2015-10"} .
Processing batch task - {"tag":"package-2017-05-preview"} .
Processing batch task - {"tag":"package-2018-01-preview"} .
FATAL: System.ArgumentOutOfRangeException: Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection.
Parameter name: startIndex
   at System.String.LastIndexOf(Char value, Int32 startIndex, Int32 count)
   at AutoRest.Go.Model.CodeModelGo.PackageVerDir() in C:\Users\autorest-ci\AppData\Local\Temp\2\PUBLISH2qmje\111_20180319T191725\autorest.go\src\Model\CodeModelGo.cs:line 64
   at AutoRest.Go.Model.CodeModelGo.get_DefaultUserAgent() in C:\Users\autorest-ci\AppData\Local\Temp\2\PUBLISH2qmje\111_20180319T191725\autorest.go\src\Model\CodeModelGo.cs:line 83
   at AutoRest.Go.Model.CodeModelGo.get_UserAgent() in C:\Users\autorest-ci\AppData\Local\Temp\2\PUBLISH2qmje\111_20180319T191725\autorest.go\src\Model\CodeModelGo.cs:line 31
   at AutoRest.Go.Templates.VersionTemplate.<ExecuteAsync>d__1.MoveNext() in C:\Users\autorest-ci\AppData\Local\Temp\2\PUBLISH2qmje\111_20180319T191725\autorest.go\src\obj\Razor\Templates\VersionTemplate.cshtml:line 28
--- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown ---
   at System.Runtime.ExceptionServices.ExceptionDispatchInfo.Throw()
   at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.TaskAwaiter.HandleNonSuccessAndDebuggerNotification(Task task)
   at AutoRest.Core.CodeGenerator.<Write>d__12.MoveNext()
--- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown ---
   at System.Runtime.ExceptionServices.ExceptionDispatchInfo.Throw()
   at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.TaskAwaiter.HandleNonSuccessAndDebuggerNotification(Task task)
   at AutoRest.Go.CodeGeneratorGo.<Generate>d__6.MoveNext() in C:\Users\autorest-ci\AppData\Local\Temp\2\PUBLISH2qmje\111_20180319T191725\autorest.go\src\CodeGeneratorGo.cs:line 91
--- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown ---
   at System.Runtime.ExceptionServices.ExceptionDispatchInfo.Throw()
   at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.TaskAwaiter.HandleNonSuccessAndDebuggerNotification(Task task)
   at AutoRest.Go.Program.<ProcessInternal>d__3.MoveNext() in C:\Users\autorest-ci\AppData\Local\Temp\2\PUBLISH2qmje\111_20180319T191725\autorest.go\src\Program.cs:line 107
--- End of stack trace from previous location where exception was thrown ---
   at System.Runtime.ExceptionServices.ExceptionDispatchInfo.Throw()
   at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.TaskAwaiter.HandleNonSuccessAndDebuggerNotification(Task task)
   at NewPlugin.<Process>d__15.MoveNext()
FATAL: go/generate - FAILED
FATAL: Error: Plugin go reported failure.
Process() cancelled due to exception : Plugin go reported failure.
Failure during batch task - {"tag":"package-2018-01-preview"} -- Error: Plugin go reported failure..
  Error: Plugin go reported failure.

vrdmr · 2018-03-20T04:11:58Z

Depends on #2705. The refactoring is needed to go in, to fix the linting issue entirely.

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T17:49:14Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/readme.md

@@ -92,10 +89,43 @@ input-file:
 - Microsoft.Automation/preview/2017-05-15-preview/job.json
 ```

+### Tag: package-2018-01


package-2018-01 [](start = 9, length = 15)

Since this package also has files from preview versions, it should also be marked as a preview package

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T17:56:14Z

...automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/preview/2017-05-15-preview/definitions.json

+        },
+        "day": {
+          "type": "string",
+          "description": "Day of the occurrence. Must be one of monday, tuesday, wednesday,thursday, friday, saturday, sunday.",


thursday [](start = 91, length = 8)

Super nit, space

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T17:57:21Z

...automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/preview/2017-05-15-preview/definitions.json

+    },
+    "AdvancedSchedule": {
+      "properties": {
+        "weekDays": {


weekDays [](start = 9, length = 8)

Are the possible values the same as in line 44?

The Jobs resource will be fixed in a separate PR as I don't have much knowledge of it. I just moved the definitions form 2015-10-31/definitions.json to prevent conflict that I was seeing earlier. Thus, right now, could we keep the spec for 2017-05-15-preview/definitions.json as it is? I'll take up the task of correcting it with the engineer who worked on it.

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T19:25:04Z

...automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/preview/2017-05-15-preview/definitions.json

+          "description": "The provisioning state of a resource."
+        }
+      },
+      "description": "Definition of job properties."
    },
    "jobCollectionItem": {


jobCollectionItem [](start = 5, length = 17)

Should this be PascalCase?

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T19:35:50Z

...automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/preview/2017-05-15-preview/definitions.json

+          "format": "double",
+          "description": "Gets or sets the next run time's offset in minutes."
+        },
+        "interval": {


interval [](start = 9, length = 8)

What type is this property?

Checking with the JobService team. This will go in a separate JobService PR. (mentioned above)

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T19:36:51Z

...automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/preview/2017-05-15-preview/definitions.json

+    "JobCreateProperties": {
+      "properties": {
+        "runbook": {
+          "$ref": "./definitions.json#/definitions/RunbookAssociationProperty",


./definitions.json [](start = 19, length = 18)

This is already the definiitions file

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T19:38:12Z

...automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/preview/2017-05-15-preview/definitions.json

+      "type": "string",
+      "required": true,
+      "in": "path",
+      "x-ms-parameter-location": "client"


client [](start = 34, length = 6)

This goes better in the method instead of the client

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T19:47:34Z

...fication/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/definitions.json

+      "type": "string",
+      "required": true,
+      "in": "path",
+      "x-ms-parameter-location": "client"


client [](start = 34, length = 6)

This goes better in the method

Err, it should be "x-ms-parameter-location": "method"

In reply to: 175917693 [](ancestors = 175917693)

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T19:48:10Z

...on/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscCompilationJob.json

+        "tags": [
+          "DscCompilationJob"
+        ],
+        "operationId": "DscCompilationJob_Create",


DscCompilationJob_Create [](start = 24, length = 24)

Is this a long running operation?

No this is not. It just submits a job and returns the JobId, which is then used to track the progress of the Job.

Should clients then poll for operation completion?

Looks like a long running operation to me

After reading this up, it makes sense to mark this as x-ms-long-running-operation. I will do that.

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T19:52:50Z

...on/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscCompilationJob.json

+          "readOnly": true,
+          "description": "Gets the creation time of the job."
+        },
+        "provisioningState": {


provisioningState [](start = 9, length = 17)

Does the service really have a provisiningState property inside another provisioningState property?

I just copied the spec from previous stable spec. The provisioningState does not have provisioningState. How do you suggest to fix this? I can remove the inner provisioningState.

The swagger should reflect faithfully the API. It just looks weird to me to have a provisiningState property inside another provisiningState property. But if that is how the service is behaving, leave it like that.

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T19:54:12Z

...on/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscCompilationJob.json

+            "$ref": "./definitions.json#/parameters/AutomationAccountNameParameter"
+          },
+          {
+            "name": "$filter",


$filter [](start = 21, length = 7)

x-ms-odata extension would be valuabe for this operation

Thanks. I'll talk with the team and take this up as a separate PR as it is not a blocker right now.

As this is a comment for a swagger in the stable folder, I strongly recommend to get whatever is inside this folder right in one PR. This way you will avoid breaking changes on generated SDKs.

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T19:56:10Z

...on/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscCompilationJob.json

+        }
+      }
+    },
+    "/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Automation/automationAccounts/{automationAccountName}/compilationjobs/{jobId}/streams/": {


/ [](start = 177, length = 1)

Is this last slash really needed?

It is still there :(

oh. It could be because of the merge issues. Fixing it now.

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T20:02:20Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscNode.json

+          "type": "string",
+          "description": "Gets or sets the name of the resource."
+        },
+        "location": {


location [](start = 9, length = 8)

So, when regenerating keys, could the location also be updated?

Checking with the team.

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T20:04:12Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscNode.json

+          "type": "string",
+          "description": "Gets or sets the account id of the node."
+        },
+        "nodeConfiguration": {


nodeConfiguration [](start = 9, length = 17)

WDYT about flattening this property?

Could you describe a little more about this? You mean the x-ms-client-flatten property?

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T20:07:02Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscNode.json

+        "tags": [
+          "DscNode"
+        ],
+        "operationId": "DscNode_ListByAutomationAccount",


DscNode_ListByAutomationAccount [](start = 24, length = 31)

This operation could also use x-ms-odata

Same as above: Thanks. I'll talk with the team and take this up as a separate PR as it is not a blocker right now.

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T20:07:47Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscNode.json

+        "tags": [
+          "NodeReports"
+        ],
+        "operationId": "NodeReports_ListByNode",


NodeReports_ListByNode [](start = 24, length = 22)

This one too, x-ms-odata

Same as above: Thanks. I'll talk with the team and take this up as a separate PR as it is not a blocker right now.

mcardosos · 2018-03-20T20:09:21Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscNode.json

+          "type": "string",
+          "description": "Gets or sets the status of the node report."
+        },
+        "refreshMode": {


refreshMode [](start = 9, length = 11)

Could this be an enum?

We aren't planning to enum this currently as the things being returned here are not finalized yet and are subject to change.

vrdmr · 2018-03-27T23:00:13Z

@mcardosos Out of the above -

MIssing stuff to fix:

Interval type.

Done

Extra slash.

Removed

Additional properties model.

As you said above, this is not a blocker currently. Also, when I remove the provisioningState from JobProvisioningStateProperty, the model issues start showing up. Also, with the current change, oav validate-example does not complain currently.

Odata extension, dscNodeReport, refresh enum. Strongly recommended to include in this PR since those are changes on the stable folder.

OData extension done. After talking to the team, the dscNodeReport enums is not in plan currently.

There might still be extra stuff to fix (we will know once CI finishes)

Will keep an eye.

mcardosos · 2018-03-28T17:51:30Z

...automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/preview/2017-05-15-preview/definitions.json

+        },
+        "interval": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "format": "byte",


byte [](start = 21, length = 4)

Does not make sense for this to be format byte, PTAL here
https://swagger.io/docs/specification/data-models/data-types/

Fixed. Changed it to String/Byte format (ref: http://docs.swagger.io/spec.html)

mcardosos · 2018-03-28T18:25:57Z

Cool! So missing stuff to fix are linter errors and model validation errors.

vrdmr · 2018-03-28T18:48:34Z

For the model issues, I already made the fix (8b68d37). Don't know why its now showing up. I'll make the commit again.

As for the linter issues. It is finding linting issues in 2015-10-31 folder, which I am fixing in 2018-01-15 resources. I am not changing previous stable version to fix it.

vrdmr · 2018-03-28T20:46:10Z

@mcardosos Fixed the model issues.

mcardosos · 2018-03-28T23:23:31Z

...fication/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2015-10-31/definitions.json

-      "x-ms-azure-resource": true,
+      "allOf": [
+        {
+          "$ref": "#/definitions/ProxyResource"


ProxyResource [](start = 33, length = 13)

Shouldn't this be just Resource? Also, since you are already doing an allof here, you dont need some of the preoperties

The same goes for other definitions in this file

In reply to: 177918018 [](ancestors = 177918018)

On the other hand this changes might be breaking changes for some SDKs. WDYT about adding these improvements into a new file that is only used by the API version introduced in this PR?

In reply to: 177918048 [](ancestors = 177918048,177918018)

Yes. But but I didn't want to change the meaning behind it. This can go to the discussion why have ProxyResource definition at all if all the resources can be either TrackedResource or just Resource. Having ProxyResource makes the spec clearer and explicit.

What about the no longer needed properties?

mcardosos · 2018-03-28T23:25:55Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/readme.md

+Please also specify `--go-sdk-folder=<path to the root directory of your azure-sdk-for-go clone>`.
+
+``` yaml $(tag) == 'package-2018-01-preview' && $(go)
+output-folder: $(go-sdk-folder)/services/automation/mgmt/2018-01-15-preview


/ [](start = 40, length = 1)

Add a preview folder here :D

I don't see other services adding a preview folder or a preview folder showing up in the Go SDK repo.

Example - Data Migration and Compute. Do I need to add this then?

There is not problem if the golang section is left out. We will figure it out later

What do you suggest then, for getting the PR through? I can send a separate PR for the same.

vrdmr · 2018-03-29T00:42:09Z

@ravbhatnagar Could you please take a look at this PR. Thanks.

mcardosos

Cool! :)
Linter errors are not related to this PR, but... awareness

ravbhatnagar · 2018-03-30T15:36:29Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscNode.json

+        }
+      }
+    },
+    "/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Automation/automationAccounts/{automationAccountName}/agentRegistrationInformation/regenerateKey": {


URL is not formed correctly. This will have RBAC issues. Is this new API or existing? Is agentInformation a resource type defined in your manifest?

This is existing. It's a proxy resources therefore not defined in the manifest. It's used by our portal code but not through ARM template.

ravbhatnagar · 2018-03-30T15:38:35Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscNode.json

+          "type": "string",
+          "description": "Gets or sets the dsc server endpoint."
+        },
+        "keys": {


keys should not be returned as part of the GET. Only via a POST.

This is also legacy API

ravbhatnagar · 2018-03-30T15:39:21Z

specification/automation/resource-manager/Microsoft.Automation/stable/2018-01-15/dscNode.json

+      },
+      "description": "Definition of the dsc node report error type."
+    },
+    "AgentRegistration": {


If this is a resource, it is missing the name, type properties. Is the id property the ARM resource id or something else.

This is a proxy resource. Also part of existing API.

ravbhatnagar · 2018-03-30T15:46:42Z

@vrdmr - Some comments. Not sure if these are existing APis or new. Please ping me to close on this.

ravbhatnagar · 2018-03-30T18:43:31Z

OK since these are all existing APis, signing off despite these issues.

lmazuel · 2018-04-06T21:20:21Z

@AutorestCI regenerate azure-sdk-for-python

…k-name-availability Add swagger support for check name availability on GitHub.Enterprise/accounts

vrdmr requested a review from a user March 19, 2018 07:28

vrdmr requested review from tiffanyachen and vladbarosan as code owners March 19, 2018 07:28

azuresdkci assigned mcardosos Mar 19, 2018

This was referenced Mar 19, 2018

[AutoPR automation/resource-manager] Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#2210

Closed

[AutoPR automation/resource-manager] Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#1322

Closed

AutorestCI mentioned this pull request Mar 20, 2018

[AutoPR automation/resource-manager] Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version Azure/azure-sdk-for-node#2477

Closed

mcardosos changed the title ~~Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version~~ [Automation] Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version Mar 20, 2018

mcardosos reviewed Mar 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

Fix based on recent comments

eea6099

AutorestCI mentioned this pull request Mar 27, 2018

[AutoPR automation/resource-manager] [Automation] Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#1453

Closed

Adding type for interval

668cb34

mcardosos reviewed Mar 28, 2018

View reviewed changes

Corrent the type for interval type

537c78b

vrdmr added 2 commits March 28, 2018 11:49

Fixing model issues in SUC resources

cf44842

Fixed the interval type model issue

635ff07

mcardosos reviewed Mar 28, 2018

View reviewed changes

vrdmr added 3 commits March 29, 2018 15:41

Change readme.md to remove new go build

5b83823

Fix Proxy Resource Properties

49e01dd

Updating DSC Compilation Jobs examples

a4b37e7

mcardosos approved these changes Mar 30, 2018

View reviewed changes

ravbhatnagar reviewed Mar 30, 2018

View reviewed changes

ravbhatnagar added ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review and removed WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Mar 30, 2018

mcardosos merged commit 2aababe into Azure:master Mar 30, 2018

vrdmr deleted the vameru-automation-new-api-2018-01-15 branch April 3, 2018 00:13

vrdmr mentioned this pull request Apr 3, 2018

[Automation] Release new 3.0.2-preview release of the SDK. Azure/azure-sdk-for-net#4187

Closed

9 tasks

AutorestCI mentioned this pull request Apr 6, 2018

[AutoPR automation/resource-manager] [Automation] Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#2360

Merged

MiaRomero mentioned this pull request May 10, 2018

Automation 3.0.2 - preview Azure/azure-sdk-for-net#4308

Merged

9 tasks

mccleanp pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 23, 2022

Merge pull request #2690 from Azure/chrismason/github-enterprise-chec…

b5519b3

…k-name-availability Add swagger support for check name availability on GitHub.Enterprise/accounts

[Automation] Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version #2690

[Automation] Adding new API spec for 2018-01-15 version #2690

Conversation

vrdmr commented Mar 19, 2018 • edited by azuresdkci Loading

PR information

Quality of Swagger

AutorestCI commented Mar 19, 2018 • edited Loading

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

AutorestCI commented Mar 19, 2018 • edited Loading

Automation for azure-libraries-for-java

AutorestCI commented Mar 19, 2018 • edited Loading

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

AutorestCI commented Mar 19, 2018 • edited Loading

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

vrdmr commented Mar 20, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mcardosos Mar 20, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vrdmr Mar 20, 2018 • edited by mcardosos Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vrdmr commented Mar 27, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vrdmr commented Mar 19, 2018 •

edited by azuresdkci

Loading

AutorestCI commented Mar 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Mar 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Mar 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Mar 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

mcardosos Mar 20, 2018 •

edited

Loading

vrdmr Mar 20, 2018 •

edited by mcardosos

Loading

vrdmr commented Mar 27, 2018 •

edited

Loading