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

Add TestResourceDirectories parameter to store Arm template paths #18851

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Feb 5, 2021

Conversation

yiliuTo
Copy link
Member

@yiliuTo yiliuTo commented Jan 28, 2021

This PR modifies the logic of deploying Arm template for Live tests and is migrated from #18773.

The original method is to scan all test-resources.json files under the directory of $ServiceDirectory, however, we want to provide a flexible way to split up Arm templates to be deployed.

This PR add a new sequence parameter of $TestResourceDirectories in archetype-sdk-tests.yml to specify directories of test-resources.json that is expected to be deployed.

@yiliuTo yiliuTo changed the title add TestResourceDirectories parameter to store multiple file paths Add TestResourceDirectories parameter to store Arm template paths Jan 28, 2021
@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Jan 28, 2021

/azp run java - spring - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@yiliuTo yiliuTo marked this pull request as draft January 28, 2021 09:23
@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Jan 28, 2021

/azp run java - spring - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Jan 28, 2021

/azp run java - spring - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

Copy link
Member

@weshaggard weshaggard left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks reasonable to me but I will defer to @benbp

@weshaggard weshaggard requested a review from benbp January 29, 2021 01:44
@yiliuTo yiliuTo marked this pull request as ready for review January 29, 2021 01:45
@benbp
Copy link
Member

benbp commented Jan 29, 2021

@weshaggard yep this is the direction we chatted about. It's nice because it doesn't require any underlying eng/common changes.

@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Feb 2, 2021

Hi @weshaggard and @benbp , now that Ben and I have come to an agreement of this PR, can we get it approved?

@benbp
Copy link
Member

benbp commented Feb 2, 2021

@yiliuTo I still had one comment otherwise looks good

@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Feb 3, 2021

@yiliuTo I still had one comment otherwise looks good

Hi @benbp , is there anything I can improve for this PR? Or have I missed your comments?

@check-enforcer
Copy link

check-enforcer bot commented Feb 3, 2021

This pull request is protected by Check Enforcer.

What is Check Enforcer?

Check Enforcer helps ensure all pull requests are covered by at least one check-run (typically an Azure Pipeline). When all check-runs associated with this pull request pass then Check Enforcer itself will pass.

Why am I getting this message?

You are getting this message because Check Enforcer did not detect any check-runs being associated with this pull request within five minutes. This may indicate that your pull request is not covered by any pipelines and so Check Enforcer is correctly blocking the pull request being merged.

What should I do now?

If the check-enforcer check-run is not passing and all other check-runs associated with this PR are passing (excluding license-cla) then you could try telling Check Enforcer to evaluate your pull request again. You can do this by adding a comment to this pull request as follows:
/check-enforcer evaluate
Typically evaulation only takes a few seconds. If you know that your pull request is not covered by a pipeline and this is expected you can override Check Enforcer using the following command:
/check-enforcer override
Note that using the override command triggers alerts so that follow-up investigations can occur (PRs still need to be approved as normal).

What if I am onboarding a new service?

Often, new services do not have validation pipelines associated with them, in order to bootstrap pipelines for a new service, you can issue the following command as a pull request comment:
/azp run prepare-pipelines
This will run a pipeline that analyzes the source tree and creates the pipelines necessary to build and validate your pull request. Once the pipeline has been created you can trigger the pipeline using the following comment:
/azp run java - [service] - ci

@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Feb 3, 2021

/azp run java - spring - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines failed to run 1 pipeline(s).

@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Feb 3, 2021

/azp run java - spring - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Feb 3, 2021

/azp run java - spring - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Feb 4, 2021

/azp run java - spring - tests

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@yiliuTo yiliuTo enabled auto-merge (squash) February 5, 2021 01:35
@yiliuTo yiliuTo disabled auto-merge February 5, 2021 01:35
@yiliuTo
Copy link
Member Author

yiliuTo commented Feb 5, 2021

/check-enforcer override

@yiliuTo yiliuTo merged commit c442b2b into Azure:master Feb 5, 2021
azure-sdk pushed a commit to azure-sdk/azure-sdk-for-java that referenced this pull request May 2, 2022
[Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.AzureStackHCI to add version stable/2022-05-01 (Azure#18851)

* Adds base for updating Microsoft.AzureStackHCI from version stable/2022-03-01 to version 2022-05-01

* Updates readme

* Updates API version in new specs and examples

* added patch API to ArcSettings resource and introduced ArcConnectivityProperties attribute

* fixing formatting issue

* adding 202 into delete example

* prettier formatting fix

* addressing code review comments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants