Microsoft.ProviderHub : Add new api-version 2021-05-01-preview #14249

sanjaiganesh · 2021-05-05T01:54:40Z

MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.

Changelog

Please ensure to add changelog with this PR by answering the following questions.

What's the purpose of the update?
- new service onboarding
- new API version
- update existing version for new feature
- update existing version to fix swagger quality issue in s360
- Other, please clarify
When you are targeting to deploy new service/feature to public regions? Please provide date, or month to public if date is not available yet.
When you expect to publish swagger? Please provide date, or month to public if date is not available yet.
If it's an update to existing version, please select SDKs of specific language and CLIs that require refresh after swagger is published.
- SDK of .NET (need service team to ensure code readiness)
- SDK of Python
- SDK of Java
- SDK of Js
- SDK of Go
- PowerShell
- CLI
- Terraform
- No, no need to refresh for updates in this PR

Contribution checklist:

I commit to follow the Breaking Change Policy of "no breaking changes"
I have reviewed the documentation for the workflow.
Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and errors have all been fixed in this PR. How to fix?

If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.

ARM API Review Checklist

Ensure to check this box if one of the following scenarios meet updates in the PR, so that label “WaitForARMFeedback” will be added automatically to involve ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs, all “removals” and “adding a new property” no more require ARM API review.
- Adding new API(s)
- Adding a new API version
- Ensure to copy the existing version into new directory structure for first commit (including refactoring) and then push new changes including version updates in separate commits. This is required to review the changes efficiently.
- Adding a new service
Please ensure you've reviewed following guidelines including ARM resource provider contract and REST guidelines. Estimated time (4 hours). This is required before you can request review from ARM API Review board.
If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged with urgency, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.

Breaking Change Review Checklist

If there are following updates in the PR, ensure to request an approval from Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.

Removing API(s) in stable version
Removing properties in stable version
Removing API version(s) in stable version
Updating API in stable or public preview version with Breaking Change Validation errors
Updating API(s) in public preview over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)

Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.

Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.

openapi-workflow-bot · 2021-05-05T01:54:42Z

Hi, @sanjaiganesh Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips.

Please ensure to do self-check against checklists in first PR comment.

PR assignee is the person auto-assigned and responsible for your current PR reviewing and merging.

For specs comparison cross API versions, Use API Specs Comparison Report Generator

If there is CI failure(s), to fix CI error(s) is mandatory for PR merging; or you need to provide justification in PR comment for explanation. How to fix?

Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. vsswagger@microsoft.com

openapi-workflow-bot · 2021-05-05T01:54:42Z

[Call for Action] To better understand Azure service dev/test scenario, and support Azure service developer better on Swagger and REST API related tests in early phase, please help to fill in with this survey https://aka.ms/SurveyForEarlyPhase. It will take 5 to 10 minutes. If you already complete survey, please neglect this comment. Thanks.

openapi-pipeline-app · 2021-05-05T01:54:43Z

Swagger Validation Report

️️✔️BreakingChange succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️⚠️LintDiff: 11 Warnings warning [Detail]

Linted configuring files (Based on source branch, openapi-validator v1.9.2 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.6 )
- providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md tag:package-2021-05-01-preview
Linted configuring files (Based on target branch, openapi-validator v1.9.2 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.6 )
- providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md tag:default

The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:

Only 10 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.

Rule	Message
⚠️ R3018 - EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enabled Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L2426
⚠️ R3018 - EnumInsteadOfBoolean	Booleans are not descriptive and make them hard to use. Consider using string enums with allowed set of values defined. Property: enabled Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4118
⚠️ R4021 - DescriptionAndTitleMissing	'expeditedRollout' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L2435
⚠️ R4021 - DescriptionAndTitleMissing	'ResourceConcurrencyControlOption' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4099
⚠️ R4021 - DescriptionAndTitleMissing	'policy' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4102
⚠️ R4021 - DescriptionAndTitleMissing	'ResourceGraphConfiguration' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4115
⚠️ R4021 - DescriptionAndTitleMissing	'enabled' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4118
⚠️ R4021 - DescriptionAndTitleMissing	'apiVersion' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4121
⚠️ R4021 - DescriptionAndTitleMissing	'resourceConcurrencyControlOptions' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4342
⚠️ R4021 - DescriptionAndTitleMissing	'resourceGraphConfiguration' model/property lacks 'description' and 'title' property. Consider adding a 'description'/'title' element. Accurate description/title is essential for maintaining reference documentation. Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4348

The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

Only 10 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.

Rule	Message
⚠️ R2001 - AvoidNestedProperties	Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L2311
⚠️ R2001 - AvoidNestedProperties	Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L2593
⚠️ R2001 - AvoidNestedProperties	Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L3493
⚠️ R2001 - AvoidNestedProperties	Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L3579
⚠️ R2001 - AvoidNestedProperties	Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L3902
⚠️ R2001 - AvoidNestedProperties	Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4372
⚠️ R2001 - AvoidNestedProperties	Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L4604
⚠️ R2017 - PutRequestResponseScheme	A PUT operation request body schema should be the same as its 200 response schema, to allow reusing the same entity between GET and PUT. If the schema of the PUT request body is a superset of the GET response body, make sure you have a PATCH operation to make the resource updatable. Operation: 'Operations_CreateOrUpdate' Request Model: 'OperationsPutContent' Response Model: 'OperationsContent' Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L769
⚠️ R2017 - PutRequestResponseScheme	A PUT operation request body schema should be the same as its 200 response schema, to allow reusing the same entity between GET and PUT. If the schema of the PUT request body is a superset of the GET response body, make sure you have a PATCH operation to make the resource updatable. Operation: 'Skus_CreateOrUpdate' Request Model: 'ResourceTypeSku' Response Model: 'SkuResource' Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L1326
⚠️ R2017 - PutRequestResponseScheme	A PUT operation request body schema should be the same as its 200 response schema, to allow reusing the same entity between GET and PUT. If the schema of the PUT request body is a superset of the GET response body, make sure you have a PATCH operation to make the resource updatable. Operation: 'Skus_CreateOrUpdateNestedResourceTypeFirst' Request Model: 'ResourceTypeSku' Response Model: 'SkuResource' Location: Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#L1478

️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for Avocado.

️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for ModelValidation.

️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for SemanticValidation.

️️✔️Cross Version BreakingChange (Base on preview version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️️✔️Cross Version BreakingChange (Base on stable version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

Compared Swaggers (Based on Oad v0.8.9)
- original: stable/2020-11-20/providerhub.json <---> new: preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json

️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There is no credential detected.

️❌[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation: 1 Errors, 5 Warnings failed [Detail]

The following tags are being changed in this PR

providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md#package-2021-05-01-preview

The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:

Rule	Message
`❌` AutorestCore/Exception	"readme":"providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-05-01-preview", "details":"Error: Plugin pre-namer reported failure."
⚠️ Modeler/MissingType	"readme":"providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-05-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'ResourceProviderManagement-resourceAccessRolesItem' has no type or format information whatsoever. Location:\n file:///home/vsts/work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#/components/schemas/ResourceProviderManagement-resourceAccessRolesItem"
⚠️ Modeler/MissingType	"readme":"providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-05-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'ResourceProviderManifestProperties-metadata' has no type or format information whatsoever. Location:\n file:///home/vsts/work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#/components/schemas/ResourceProviderManifestProperties-metadata"
⚠️ Modeler/MissingType	"readme":"providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-05-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'ResourceType-metadata' has no type or format information whatsoever. Location:\n file:///home/vsts/work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#/components/schemas/ResourceType-metadata"
⚠️ Modeler/MissingType	"readme":"providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-05-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'ResourceProviderManifest-metadata' has no type or format information whatsoever. Location:\n file:///home/vsts/work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#/components/schemas/ResourceProviderManifest-metadata"
⚠️ Modeler/MissingType	"readme":"providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-05-01-preview", "details":"The schema 'OperationsDefinition-properties' has no type or format information whatsoever. Location:\n file:///home/vsts/work/1/azure-rest-api-specs/specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json#/components/schemas/OperationsDefinition-properties"
💬 AutorestCore/Exception	"readme":"providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-05-01-preview", "details":"> Installing AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0)"
💬 AutorestCore/Exception	"readme":"providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-05-01-preview", "details":"> Installed AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0->1.8.0)"
💬 AutorestCore/Exception	"readme":"providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md", "tag":"package-2021-05-01-preview", "details":"> Loading AutoRest extension '@autorest/modelerfour' (4.15.456->4.15.456)"

️️✔️[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for PrettierCheck.

️️✔️[Staging] SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for SpellCheck.

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

openapi-pipeline-app · 2021-05-05T01:54:43Z

Swagger Generation Artifacts

️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-js warning [Detail]

⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from b5f8384. SDK Automation 14.0.0

warn	Skip initScript due to not configured
command	autorest --version=V2 --typescript --license-header=MICROSOFT_MIT_NO_VERSION --use=@microsoft.azure/autorest.typescript@4.4.4 --typescript-sdks-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-js/azure-sdk-for-js ../../azure-rest-api-specs/specification/providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md
warn	No file changes detected after generation
warn	No package detected after generation

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

⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from b5f8384. SDK Automation 14.0.0

command	sh scripts/automation_init.sh ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/initOutput.json
cmderr	[automation_init.sh] ERROR: pip's dependency resolver does not currently take into account all the packages that are installed. This behaviour is the source of the following dependency conflicts.
cmderr	[automation_init.sh] azure-mgmt-core 1.2.2 requires azure-core<2.0.0,>=1.9.0, but you have azure-core 1.6.0 which is incompatible.
cmderr	[automation_init.sh] ERROR: pip's dependency resolver does not currently take into account all the packages that are installed. This behaviour is the source of the following dependency conflicts.
cmderr	[automation_init.sh] azure-mgmt-core 1.2.2 requires azure-core<2.0.0,>=1.9.0, but you have azure-core 1.6.0 which is incompatible.
cmderr	[automation_init.sh] WARNING: Skipping azure-nspkg as it is not installed.
command	sh scripts/automation_generate.sh ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-python_tmp/generateOutput.json
warn	No package detected after generation

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

️✔️Succeeded [Logs]Release - Generate from b5f8384. SDK Automation 14.0.0

command	sh ./initScript.sh ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/initInput.json ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/initOutput.json
command	go run ./tools/generator/main.go ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/generateInput.json ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/generateOutput.json

️✔️providerhub/mgmt/2020-11-20/providerhub [View full logs] [Release SDK Changes]
```
info	[Changelog] This is a new package
```

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

⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from b5f8384. SDK Automation 14.0.0

command	./eng/mgmt/automation/init.sh ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/initOutput.json
command	./eng/mgmt/automation/generate.py ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/generateOutput.json
cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-10 23:00:27 INFO [VERSION][Not Found] cannot find version for "com.azure.resourcemanager:azure-resourcemanager-providerhub"
cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-10 23:00:27 INFO [VERSION][Not Found] cannot find stable version, current version "1.0.0-beta.1"
cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-10 23:00:27 INFO autorest --version=3.1.3 --use=@autorest/java@4.0.25 --java.azure-libraries-for-java-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-java --java.output-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-java/sdk/providerhub/azure-resourcemanager-providerhub --java.namespace=com.azure.resourcemanager.providerhub   --java --pipeline.modelerfour.additional-checks=false --pipeline.modelerfour.lenient-model-deduplication=true --azure-arm --verbose --sdk-integration --fluent=lite --java.fluent=lite --java.license-header=MICROSOFT_MIT_SMALL ../azure-rest-api-specs/specification/providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md
cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-10 23:01:08 INFO [CI][Success] Write to ci.yml
cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-10 23:01:08 INFO [POM][Process] dealing with pom.xml
cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-10 23:01:08 INFO [POM][Skip] pom already has module azure-resourcemanager-providerhub
cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-10 23:01:08 INFO [POM][Success] Write to pom.xml
cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-10 23:01:08 INFO [POM][Process] dealing with root pom
cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-10 23:01:08 INFO [POM][Success] Write to root pom

️✔️azure-resourcemanager-providerhub [View full logs] [Release SDK Changes]

cmderr	[Inst] 2021-05-10 23:04:28 DEBUG Got artifact_id: azure-resourcemanager-providerhub
cmderr	[Inst] 2021-05-10 23:04:28 DEBUG Got artifact: pom.xml
cmderr	[Inst] 2021-05-10 23:04:28 DEBUG Got artifact: azure-resourcemanager-providerhub-1.0.0-beta.1.jar
cmderr	[Inst] 2021-05-10 23:04:28 DEBUG Match jar package: azure-resourcemanager-providerhub-1.0.0-beta.1.jar
cmderr	[Inst] 2021-05-10 23:04:28 DEBUG output: {"full": "```sh\ncurl -L \"https://portal.azure-devex-tools.com/api/sdk-dl-pub?p=Azure/14249/azure-sdk-for-java/azure-resourcemanager-providerhub/azure-resourcemanager-providerhub-1.0.0-beta.1.jar\" -o azure-resourcemanager-providerhub-1.0.0-beta.1.jar\nmvn install:install-file -DgroupId=com.azure.resourcemanager -DartifactId=azure-resourcemanager-providerhub -Dversion=1.0.0-beta.0 -Dfile=azure-resourcemanager-providerhub-1.0.0-beta.1.jar -Dpackaging=jar -DgeneratePom=true
```"}

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

️✔️Succeeded [Logs]Release - Generate from b5f8384. SDK Automation 14.0.0

warn	Skip initScript due to not configured
command	sudo apt-get install -y dotnet-sdk-5.0
command	autorest --version=V2 --csharp --reflect-api-versions --license-header=MICROSOFT_MIT_NO_VERSION --use=@microsoft.azure/autorest.csharp@2.3.82 --csharp-sdks-folder=/home/vsts/work/1/s/azure-sdk-for-net/sdk ../azure-rest-api-specs/specification/providerhub/resource-manager/readme.md
cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied
cmderr	[Autorest] realpath(): Permission denied

️✔️Microsoft.Azure.Management.ProviderHub [View full logs] [Release SDK Changes]
- Microsoft.Azure.Management.ProviderHub.1.0.0-beta.1.nupkg
- Microsoft.Azure.Management.ProviderHub.1.0.0-beta.1.snupkg

️️✔️[Staging] ApiDocPreview succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

 Please click here to preview with your @microsoft account.

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

openapi-workflow-bot · 2021-05-05T01:56:25Z

Hi @sanjaiganesh, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of Avocado, semantic validation, model validation, breaking change, lintDiff.

Task	How to fix	Priority	Support (Microsoft alias)
Avocado	Fix-Avocado	High	ruowan
Semantic validation	Fix-SemanticValidation-Error	High	raychen, jianyxi
Model validation	Fix-ModelValidation-Error	High	raychen,jianyxi
LintDiff	Fix-LintDiff	high	jianyxi, ruoxuan

If you need further help, please feedback via swagger feedback."

sanjaiganesh · 2021-05-05T18:56:20Z

azp /run

mentat9 · 2021-05-08T00:23:40Z

    "enabled": {

ARM recommendation would be to model this as a string enum property like "rolloutType": { "Default", "Expedited" }. This type of property is easier for users to discover, learn, understand, and use. The values help convey the meaning. Also, if you use modelAsString: true, you can add enum values later without an API version change.

Refers to: specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json:2426 in ec20e1c. [](commit_id = ec20e1c, deletion_comment = False)

mentat9 · 2021-05-08T00:26:15Z

    "enabled": {

Similar suggestion here, something more like:
"activeStatus": { "Enabled", "Disabled" }.

Refers to: specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json:4118 in 47c67ce. [](commit_id = 47c67ce, deletion_comment = False)

sanjaiganesh · 2021-05-08T00:44:58Z

    "enabled": {

ExpeditedRollout.Enabled : Agree on the enum flexibility. But this model is chosen to have an object/container to add more options around expedited rollout. We are not expecting more rollout types. Either regular or hotfix/expedited only. If rollout type is introduced, then we need to have another object like 'expeditedRolloutOptions' {} to capture any settings related to it.

In reply to: 834895459

Refers to: specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json:2426 in 47c67ce. [](commit_id = 47c67ce, deletion_comment = False)

sanjaiganesh · 2021-05-08T00:46:35Z

    "enabled": {

same here. ARG integration is either enabled or disabled. Not expecting more values in future.

In reply to: 834897149

Refers to: specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json:4118 in 47c67ce. [](commit_id = 47c67ce, deletion_comment = False)

mentat9 · 2021-05-08T08:19:15Z

    "enabled": {

Sure, it's just a suggestion, not blocking. FTR, it's not only flexibility/futureproofing that makes enums better. They are also easier to understand, learn, and use as well. And it's the direction Azure API consistency is pointing as well: https://armwiki.azurewebsites.net/rp_onboarding/process/api_review_best_practices.html#common-issues-found-in-review. Please consider this bigger picture in future API work.

In reply to: 834910361

Refers to: specification/providerhub/resource-manager/Microsoft.ProviderHub/preview/2021-05-01-preview/providerhub.json:4118 in 47c67ce. [](commit_id = 47c67ce, deletion_comment = False)

sanjaiganesh · 2021-05-10T19:19:24Z

@leni-msft could you please merge this PR ?

…#14249) * initial commit establish base (previous stable version) * adding preview api * update right examples. prettier fix * adding concurrency & ARG properties * adding management * fixing management

initial commit establish base (previous stable version)

ec20e1c

openapi-assignment-bot bot assigned leni-msft May 5, 2021

openapi-pipeline-app bot added the CI-FixRequiredOnFailure label May 5, 2021

openapi-pipeline-app bot removed the CI-FixRequiredOnFailure label May 5, 2021

adding preview api

d39f868

sanjaiganesh added 3 commits May 5, 2021 12:36

update right examples. prettier fix

d521e74

adding concurrency & ARG properties

30684bb

adding management

aa1b592

openapi-pipeline-app bot added CI-FixRequiredOnFailure and removed CI-FixRequiredOnFailure labels May 5, 2021

sanjaiganesh changed the title ~~[DO NOT REVIEW. YET!] Microsoft.Provider : Add new api-version 2021-05-01-preview~~ [DO NOT REVIEW. YET!] Microsoft.ProviderHub : Add new api-version 2021-05-01-preview May 5, 2021

sanjaiganesh added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label May 6, 2021

sanjaiganesh changed the title ~~[DO NOT REVIEW. YET!] Microsoft.ProviderHub : Add new api-version 2021-05-01-preview~~ Microsoft.ProviderHub : Add new api-version 2021-05-01-preview May 6, 2021

fixing management

47c67ce

mentat9 added ARMChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when require changes after ARM review and removed WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels May 8, 2021

mentat9 removed the ARMChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when require changes after ARM review label May 8, 2021

mentat9 added the ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review label May 8, 2021

leni-msft approved these changes May 10, 2021

View reviewed changes

leni-msft merged commit b5f8384 into Azure:master May 10, 2021

sanjaiganesh mentioned this pull request May 26, 2021

Sanjaiga/removetemplatedeploymentoptions #14522

Merged

26 tasks

laxmankumar12 mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2021

Add endpointType support in RPaaS #14616

Closed

25 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Microsoft.ProviderHub : Add new api-version 2021-05-01-preview #14249

Microsoft.ProviderHub : Add new api-version 2021-05-01-preview #14249

sanjaiganesh commented May 5, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented May 5, 2021

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented May 5, 2021

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented May 5, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented May 5, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented May 5, 2021

sanjaiganesh commented May 5, 2021

mentat9 commented May 8, 2021 •

edited

Loading

mentat9 commented May 8, 2021

sanjaiganesh commented May 8, 2021

sanjaiganesh commented May 8, 2021 •

edited

Loading

mentat9 commented May 8, 2021

sanjaiganesh commented May 10, 2021

Microsoft.ProviderHub : Add new api-version 2021-05-01-preview #14249

Microsoft.ProviderHub : Add new api-version 2021-05-01-preview #14249

Conversation

sanjaiganesh commented May 5, 2021 • edited Loading

Changelog

Contribution checklist:

ARM API Review Checklist

Breaking Change Review Checklist

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented May 5, 2021

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented May 5, 2021

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented May 5, 2021 • edited Loading

Swagger Validation Report

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented May 5, 2021 • edited Loading

Swagger Generation Artifacts

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented May 5, 2021

sanjaiganesh commented May 5, 2021

mentat9 commented May 8, 2021 • edited Loading

mentat9 commented May 8, 2021

sanjaiganesh commented May 8, 2021

sanjaiganesh commented May 8, 2021 • edited Loading

mentat9 commented May 8, 2021

sanjaiganesh commented May 10, 2021

sanjaiganesh commented May 5, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented May 5, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented May 5, 2021 •

edited

Loading

mentat9 commented May 8, 2021 •

edited

Loading

sanjaiganesh commented May 8, 2021 •

edited

Loading