Add userAssignedIdentities #3283
Conversation
Automation for azure-sdk-for-pythonThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-nodeThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-javaThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-rubyNothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-ruby |
Automation for azure-sdk-for-goThe initial PR has been merged into your service PR: |
|
Thanks @chidmdxx! The changes in the PR look good. However this spec has a large number of ARM violations in the linter CI. They are all unrelated to the change in this PR however they should be addressed. A large number of them could easily be resolved with some improved descriptions or adding examples. Others could be resolved by applying for suppression until a longer term fix can be implemented. Would it be possible to address any of these? |
|
ping @chidmdxx |
|
@annatisch sorry missed the notification, how can we apply for a temporal suppression, we've been trying to get these down via a team effort instead of one person PR |
|
Thanks @chidmdxx - please contact @ravbhatnagar to apply for suppressions. :) |
| @@ -2952,6 +2952,11 @@ | |||
| "name": "ResourceIdentityType", | |||
| "modelAsString": false | |||
| } | |||
| }, | |||
| "userAssignedIdentities":{ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This object has a defined shape correct? Can we add the complete schema for this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
there is no defined shape
it's a dictionary where keys are the resource ids and the value is an empty jobject
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added the example file as discussed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we have something similar to what compute did
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Customer s will have hard time using the SDK without having a shape defined for such fields
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks @anuchandy was having a hard time with how to shape the swagger property
|
Discussed offline. Added an example for the shape of the object. |
ravbhatnagar
added
the
ARMSignedOff
|
@annatisch @chidmdxx - If the violations are something we will fix, there is no suppression process. We are tracking towards fixing these. This should not block the PR. |
|
@chidmdxx - could you please let me know you intentions regarding the remaining violations? If you intend to fix them in subsequent PRs I will go ahead and merge this one. |
|
@annatisch as @ravbhatnagar mentioned we are tracking in ARM to fix the violation is subsequent PRs |
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
api-versionin the path should match theapi-versionin the spec).Quality of Swagger