Ksvijayv/purview metadata policies initial #14938

kshitizvijay · 2021-06-22T18:26:27Z

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 · 2021-06-22T18:26:29Z

Hi, @kshitizvijay 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. [email protected]

openapi-workflow-bot · 2021-06-22T18:26:30Z

[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 · 2021-06-22T18:26:31Z

Swagger Validation Report

️️✔️BreakingChange succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️⚠️LintDiff: 5 Warnings warning [Detail]

Linted configuring files (Based on source branch, openapi-validator v1.10.1 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.10 )
- purview/data-plane/readme.md tag:package-2021-07-01
Linted configuring files (Based on target branch, openapi-validator v1.10.1 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.10 )
- purview/data-plane/readme.md tag:default

The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:

Rule	Message
⚠️ R2001 - AvoidNestedProperties	Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json#L388
⚠️ R2001 - AvoidNestedProperties	Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json#L499
⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames	OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'MetadataPolicyModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'MetadataPolicy' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json#L59
⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames	OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'MetadataPolicyModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'MetadataPolicy' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json#L110
⚠️ R2063 - OperationIdNounConflictingModelNames	OperationId has a noun that conflicts with one of the model names in definitions section. The model name will be disambiguated to 'MetadataPolicyModel'. Consider using the plural form of 'MetadataPolicy' to avoid this. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json#L168

️️✔️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 Breaking Changes succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There is no credential detected.

️️✔️[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation

The following tags are being changed in this PR

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

Validation passes for PrettierCheck.

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

Validation passes for SpellCheck.

️️✔️[Staging] Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).

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

openapi-pipeline-app · 2021-06-22T18:26:31Z

Swagger Generation Artifacts

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

 Please click here to preview with your @microsoft account.

️️✔️[Staging] SDK Breaking Change Tracking succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Breaking Changes Tracking

️❌ azure-sdk-for-net-track2 failed [Detail]

❌Failed [Logs]Release - Generate from 1424fc4. SDK Automation 14.0.0

command	pwsh ./eng/scripts/Automation-Sdk-Init.ps1 ../azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/initOutput.json
warn	File azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/initOutput.json not found to read
command	pwsh ./eng/scripts/Automation-Sdk-Generate.ps1 ../azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-net_tmp/generateOutput.json
warn	No file changes detected after generation
error	Fatal error: packageFolderFromFileSearch not configured and could not be found in legacy config
packageFolderFromFileSearch not configured and could not be found in legacy config
Error: packageFolderFromFileSearch not configured and could not be found in legacy config
    at workflowDetectChangedPackages (/home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/automation/workflow.js:422:23)
    at workflowHandleReadmeMd (/home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/automation/workflow.js:168:11)
    at async Object.exports.workflowMain (/home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/automation/workflow.js:83:9)
    at async Object.exports.sdkAutoMain (/home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/automation/entrypoint.js:152:13)
    at async /home/vsts/work/1/a/unified-pipeline-runtime/private/openapi-sdk-automation/lib/cli/cli.js:20:18

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

jhendrixMSFT

Looks like you also are missing an entry in https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/master/specification/purview/data-plane/readme.md

...e.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2020-12-01-preview/purviewmetadatapolicies.json

jhendrixMSFT · 2021-07-09T15:19:08Z

@JeffreyRichter @johanste has this been reviewed by the REST board?

ghost · 2021-08-01T16:02:12Z

Hi, @kshitizvijay. 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 no-recent-activity label.

mikekistler

I left a number of comments, all minor but important to fix to get the best results from the SDK generators.

...-plane/Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/stable/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json

openapi-workflow-bot · 2021-08-27T06:00:38Z

Hi @kshitizvijay, 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."

kshitizvijay · 2021-08-27T06:47:44Z

@mikekistler

I cannot understand the reason behind the SDK azure-sdk-for-net-track2 failure.
The logs are not helping.

...plane/Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json

kshitizvijay · 2021-09-01T18:55:40Z

@jhendrixMSFT
I can't seem to pass this check.
SDK azure-sdk-for-net-track2

Who Can I contact to solve this?

jhendrixMSFT · 2021-09-01T19:38:29Z

@kshitizvijay the azure-sdk-for-net-track2 isn't a required step, please ignore this failure for now.

mikekistler · 2021-09-01T23:49:50Z

@jhendrixMSFT Why do we run checks that are not required? It seems like this only creates confusion and delay. If this check isn't required, can we remove it from list somehow? Are there other checks here that are not required?

jhendrixMSFT · 2021-09-07T15:52:42Z

@nickzhums do you know the answers?

nickzhums · 2021-09-07T16:40:30Z

this repo is maintained by Swagger tooling team. cc @josefree

mikekistler

I found a few more small issues. The x-ms-error - x-ms-error-code is probably on me ... I think I had the wrong name in my earlier comment / suggested change. Sorry about that.

Outside of these few minor changes, this looks good to me.

mikekistler · 2021-09-10T14:44:40Z

...plane/Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json

+  "swagger": "2.0",
+  "info": {
+    "title": "Purview Metadata Policies Service REST API Document",
+    "version": "2021-07-01"


Suggested change

"version": "2021-07-01"

"version": "2021-07-01-preview"

Would this change mean the requests would have "?api-version=2021-07-01-preview" ?
Currently the service only works with 2021-07-01.

Yes -- preview versions of the service should use an api-version that ends in "-preview". If your service does not do that currently then you should leave the version as it is for now, but please use this convention for future previews.

The service does not implement it right now.
I will leave the version as it is.

...plane/Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json

mikekistler · 2021-09-10T14:59:00Z

...plane/Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json

+      ],
+      "type": "object",
+      "properties": {
+        "values": {


@JeffreyRichter @johanste @tg-msft @markweitzel The Azure API Guidelines say that this property should be named "value" rather than "values". Personally I like "values" better since it is an array, so plural feels better to me. Should we allow "value" or "values", or stick to just the one name even though it is a bit clunky?

Personally, I like "value" better too but Azure has always use "value" in the past.
@johanste probably has the most experience with how impactful this change would be, so I'd leave it to him to decide.

The value (singular) naming convention comes from OData. I don't think we've been consistent in Azure. I'd do an inventory of what is being used today and unless there is a clear winner/a large majority uses value, I don't have a strong opinion. We obviously wouldn't want to recommend breaking changes to "fix" the consistency problem, however.

@kshitizvijay We want all Azure services to use value as the property name for the array in a pageable response. Please update the API to comply with this guidance.

We will update the API to use value as the property name for the array in a pageable response.
Any guide on how to introduce this breaking change?

You need to go through the Breaking Changes Process.

For APIs in preview this is not onerous -- you just have document the breaking change and then keep the prior version functioning for at least 90 days.

* initial commit for purview metadata policies * fixed paths and added fields * fixed issues and added examples for purview metadatapolicy * fixed example file name for purview metadatapolicy * fixed words * fixed model issue * removed readonly property from example * removed readonly proprties from body * fixed response status codes * fixed prettier issue * updated metadata roles API for Purview Metadata policy service * spellcheck and prettier fix * removed skiptoken, count and added autorest extension * sdk changes * fixed not foundbug * removed collection path * removed unreferenced file * fixed error code Co-authored-by: Kshitiz Vijayvargiya <[email protected]>

Kshitiz Vijayvargiya added 2 commits June 22, 2021 23:00

initial commit for purview metadata policies

70f5ab0

fixed paths and added fields

7479141

openapi-assignment-bot bot assigned jhendrixMSFT Jun 22, 2021

jhendrixMSFT requested changes Jul 7, 2021

View reviewed changes

...e.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2020-12-01-preview/purviewmetadatapolicies.json Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Kshitiz Vijayvargiya added 8 commits July 8, 2021 07:18

fixed issues and added examples for purview metadatapolicy

b7467ae

fixed example file name for purview metadatapolicy

fcc8e47

fixed words

a91d9a3

fixed model issue

1d6027a

removed readonly property from example

fd33b80

removed readonly proprties from body

670a762

fixed response status codes

557bbd4

fixed prettier issue

15e6bb5

kshitizvijay requested a review from jhendrixMSFT July 9, 2021 00:36

markweitzel added the APIStewardshipBoard-ReviewRequested This should be reviewed by the Azure API Stewardship team in partnership with the service team. label Jul 12, 2021

Kshitiz Vijayvargiya added 2 commits July 13, 2021 09:48

updated metadata roles API for Purview Metadata policy service

7065257

spellcheck and prettier fix

da5fdba

jhendrixMSFT added the Reassign label Jul 16, 2021

ghost added no-recent-activity and removed no-recent-activity labels Aug 1, 2021

removed skiptoken, count and added autorest extension

243468a

jhendrixMSFT removed the Reassign label Aug 3, 2021

mikekistler requested changes Aug 22, 2021

View reviewed changes

mikekistler added Reviewed-ChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when assignee request changes after review and removed APIStewardshipBoard-ReviewRequested This should be reviewed by the Azure API Stewardship team in partnership with the service team. labels Aug 26, 2021

fixed not foundbug

ab2524b

openapi-pipeline-app bot removed the CI-FixRequiredOnFailure label Aug 27, 2021

jhendrixMSFT reviewed Aug 30, 2021

View reviewed changes

...plane/Azure.Analytics.Purview.MetadataPolicies/preview/2021-07-01/purviewMetadataPolicy.json Show resolved Hide resolved

removed collection path

8773ca2

openapi-pipeline-app bot added the CI-FixRequiredOnFailure label Aug 31, 2021

removed unreferenced file

4d986a0

openapi-pipeline-app bot removed the CI-FixRequiredOnFailure label Aug 31, 2021

jhendrixMSFT approved these changes Sep 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

lmazuel mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2021

Board Light Review: Purview Metadata Policies Azure/azure-sdk#3334

Closed

mikekistler approved these changes Sep 10, 2021

View reviewed changes

fixed error code

1d16a4e

This was referenced Sep 13, 2021

Determine "value" or "values" recommendation #16015

Closed

Determine "value" or "values" recommendation microsoft/api-guidelines#287

Closed

lmazuel merged commit 1424fc4 into Azure:main Sep 17, 2021

mikekistler added APIStewardshipBoard-ReviewRequested This should be reviewed by the Azure API Stewardship team in partnership with the service team. and removed Reviewed-ChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when assignee request changes after review labels Sep 20, 2021

mikekistler mentioned this pull request Sep 23, 2021

[Cognitive - Purview] Metadata Policies API review #16141

Open

mikekistler linked an issue Sep 23, 2021 that may be closed by this pull request

[Cognitive - Purview] Metadata Policies API review #16141

Open

mikekistler added the Purview label Jan 27, 2022

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Ksvijayv/purview metadata policies initial #14938

Ksvijayv/purview metadata policies initial #14938

kshitizvijay commented Jun 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented Jun 22, 2021

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented Jun 22, 2021

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Breaking Changes Tracking

jhendrixMSFT left a comment

jhendrixMSFT commented Jul 9, 2021

ghost commented Aug 1, 2021

mikekistler left a comment

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented Aug 27, 2021

kshitizvijay commented Aug 27, 2021

kshitizvijay commented Sep 1, 2021

jhendrixMSFT commented Sep 1, 2021

mikekistler commented Sep 1, 2021

jhendrixMSFT commented Sep 7, 2021

nickzhums commented Sep 7, 2021

mikekistler left a comment

mikekistler Sep 10, 2021

kshitizvijay Sep 12, 2021 •

edited

Loading

mikekistler Sep 13, 2021

kshitizvijay Sep 16, 2021

mikekistler Sep 10, 2021

JeffreyRichter Sep 10, 2021

johanste Sep 10, 2021

mikekistler Sep 21, 2021

kshitizvijay Sep 22, 2021

mikekistler Sep 22, 2021

Ksvijayv/purview metadata policies initial #14938

Ksvijayv/purview metadata policies initial #14938

Conversation

kshitizvijay commented Jun 22, 2021 • edited Loading

Changelog

Contribution checklist:

ARM API Review Checklist

Breaking Change Review Checklist

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented Jun 22, 2021

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented Jun 22, 2021

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 22, 2021 • edited Loading

Swagger Validation Report

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 22, 2021 • edited Loading

Swagger Generation Artifacts

Breaking Changes Tracking

jhendrixMSFT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jhendrixMSFT commented Jul 9, 2021

ghost commented Aug 1, 2021

mikekistler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openapi-workflow-bot bot commented Aug 27, 2021

kshitizvijay commented Aug 27, 2021

kshitizvijay commented Sep 1, 2021

jhendrixMSFT commented Sep 1, 2021

mikekistler commented Sep 1, 2021

jhendrixMSFT commented Sep 7, 2021

nickzhums commented Sep 7, 2021

mikekistler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kshitizvijay Sep 12, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kshitizvijay commented Jun 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jun 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

kshitizvijay Sep 12, 2021 •

edited

Loading