-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.1k
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 NSP API to workspaces #28733
Add NSP API to workspaces #28733
Conversation
Next Steps to MergeNext steps that must be taken to merge this PR:
|
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
Generated ApiView
|
...Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2021-10-01/Workspaces_NetworkSecurityPerimeter_API.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2021-10-01/Workspaces_NetworkSecurityPerimeter_API.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
} | ||
}, | ||
"default": { | ||
"description": "BadRequest", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
resolved
"$ref": "#/parameters/configurationName" | ||
} | ||
], | ||
"responses": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we always send 202
"responses": { | ||
"202": { | ||
"description": "Request to reconcile the association accepted.", | ||
"headers": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Consider adding retry-after ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
we always send 202
...Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2021-10-01/Workspaces_NetworkSecurityPerimeter_API.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2021-10-01/Workspaces_NetworkSecurityPerimeter_API.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2021-10-01/Workspaces_NetworkSecurityPerimeter_API.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…to resolve go sdk erros
@raych1 @Alancere all the issues and types are fixed. Can we get a signoff for sdk? |
@MaryGao @qiaozha @kazrael2119 can we get the |
block this pr as #28945 (comment) |
"info": { | ||
"version": "2021-10-01", | ||
"title": "Network security perimeter common type definitions", | ||
"description": "Common types for network security perimeters based on a shared API specification. These common, versioned type definitions are intended for resource providers (RPs, except Network RP) to use, and reuse, for defining their own API versions that share a set of type definitions that is consistent across providers.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To avoid future maintainers modifying these definitions, will you be doing another update to consume common-types v5, and remove this reference, in e.g. next api version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll make the team aware of this so that this can be prevented/fixed in future api versions. Thanks Tim!
@kazrael2119 I went through the PR you mentioned. Our package only includes the stable version of APIs. We haven't included any preview versions. Please let me know what is blocking our PR and how can we get unblocked on this. Thanks! |
@akshitgoyal the block is Operational.Insight has multi different api versions in one tag and this needs @JeffreyRichter approve |
I had a meeting with @dulikvor yesterday and his team is going to split the swaggers into separate services (fixing some versioning) and make a new PR. |
@JeffreyRichter @kazrael2119 Thank you so much for the context. Are there any actions items pending on us due to this change? do we have to do this PR again to account for any new changes? Also if possible, can you please tell me an estimate of delay to this PR so I can let teams concerned with this PR know? |
You need to discuss with @dulikvor |
Hi, @akshitgoyal. Your PR has no update for 14 days and it is marked as stale PR. If no further update for over 14 days, the bot will close the PR. If you want to refresh the PR, please remove |
Hi, @akshitgoyal. Your PR has no update for 14 days and it is marked as stale PR. If no further update for over 14 days, the bot will close the PR. If you want to refresh the PR, please remove |
Hi, @akshitgoyal. Your PR has no update for 14 days and it is marked as stale PR. If no further update for over 14 days, the bot will close the PR. If you want to refresh the PR, please remove |
Hi, @akshitgoyal. The PR will be closed since the PR has no update for 28 days. If you still need the PR review to proceed, please reopen it and @ mention PR assignee. |
ARM (Control Plane) API Specification Update Pull Request
Tip
Overwhelmed by all this guidance? See the
Getting help
section at the bottom of this PR description.Note
As of January 2024 there is no PR assignee. This is expected. See https://aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review.
PR review workflow diagram
Please understand this diagram before proceeding. It explains how to get your PR approved & merged.
Click here to see the details of Step 1, Breaking Changes review
If you are in purview of Step 1 of the diagram, follow the Breaking Changes review process.
IMPORTANT! This applies even if you believe your PR was mislabeled, for any reason, including tool failure.
Click here to see the details of Step 2, ARM review
See https://aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review.
Click here to see the diagram footnotes
Diagram footnotes
[1] See ARM review queue (for PR merge queues, see [2]).
[2] public repo merge queue, private repo merge queue (for ARM review queue, [1])
The ARM reviewer on-call engineer visits the merge queue twice a day, so the approximate ETA for merges is 12 - 24 hours.
Purpose of this PR
What's the purpose of this PR? Check the specific option that applies. This is mandatory!
Due diligence checklist
To merge this PR, you must go through the following checklist and confirm you understood
and followed the instructions by checking all the boxes:
ARM resource provider contract and
REST guidelines (estimated time: 4 hours).
I understand this is required before I can proceed to the diagram Step 2, "ARM API changes review", for this PR.
Additional information
Viewing API changes
For convenient view of the API changes made by this PR, refer to the URLs provided in the table
in the
Generated ApiView
comment added to this PR. You can use ApiView to show API versions diff.Suppressing failures
If one or multiple validation error/warning suppression(s) is detected in your PR, please follow the
suppressions guide to get approval.
Getting help
Purpose of this PR
andDue diligence checklist
.Next Steps to Merge
comment. It will appear within few minutes of submitting this PR and will continue to be up-to-date with current PR state.and https://aka.ms/ci-fix.
queued
state, please add a comment with contents/azp run
.This should result in a new comment denoting a
PR validation pipeline
has started and the checks should be updated after few minutes.