Skip to content
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

Adding June Swagger Update - Azure Container Instance #3170

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 7, 2018

Conversation

samkreter
Copy link
Contributor

@samkreter samkreter commented May 31, 2018

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

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented May 31, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-node

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-node#2618

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented May 31, 2018

Automation for azure-libraries-for-java

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
AutorestCI/azure-libraries-for-java#37

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented May 31, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-ruby

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-ruby#1353

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented May 31, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-python#2320

@AutorestCI
Copy link

AutorestCI commented Jun 1, 2018

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

The initial PR has been merged into your service PR:
Azure/azure-sdk-for-go#1990

@lmazuel
Copy link
Member

lmazuel commented Jun 1, 2018

Hi @samkreter !
Please update the Readme to add a new tag and change "Basic Information" to point to this new tag. Then the bot generation will be meaningfull. Thanks!

@marstr marstr requested a review from ravbhatnagar June 4, 2018 20:36
@marstr marstr added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Jun 4, 2018
Copy link
Member

@marstr marstr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Member

@marstr marstr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Now we're just waiting for @ravbhatnagar

},
"/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.ContainerInstance/containerGroups/{containerGroupName}/containers/{containerName}/logs": {
"get": {
"operationId": "ContainerLogs_List",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are some semantics that we introduce to OperationIDs in AutoRest. Chiefly, we use the prefix here to denote an "operation group". For some languages, each operation group gets is own Client type.

For that reason, I'd recommend having fewer Operation Groups:

ContainerGroupUsage_List -> ContainerGroups_ListUsage
ContainerLogs_List -> Container_ListLogs
StartContainer_LaunchExec -> Container_StartExecLaunch

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I took another look and found another thing we may want to tweak, not necessary to fix it though! Just acknowledge if you don't want to fix it. :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@marstr I would rather save those for the next PR so we can get this June release out. I can update those changes quickly for another PR.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It'd be a breaking change in the future, so we should do it now or never. Your choice though. :)

Copy link
Member

@marstr marstr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When comparing the two API Versions against one another, this is actually a relatively small change. Nothing troublesome jumped out to me.

edit: wrong window, though the approval counts.

@ravbhatnagar 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 Jun 6, 2018
@marstr marstr merged commit 709ef95 into Azure:master Jun 7, 2018
@bsiegel bsiegel removed the review label Jun 7, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants