Skip to content

Conversation

mikeharder
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Aug 8, 2025

PR validation pipeline restarted successfully. If there is ApiView generated, it will be updated in this comment.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the BreakingChangeReviewRequired <valid label in PR review process>add this label when breaking change review is required label Aug 8, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 8, 2025

API Change Check

APIView identified API level changes in this PR and created the following API reviews

Language API Review for Package
Swagger Microsoft.Widget-Widget
TypeSpec Microsoft.Widget
Go sdk/resourcemanager/widget/armwidget
Python azure-mgmt-widget
C# Azure.ResourceManager.Widget
Java com.azure.resourcemanager:azure-resourcemanager-widget
JavaScript @azure/arm-widget

@mikeharder
Copy link
Member Author

@mikekistler, @JeffreyRichter: This is just our sample (no actual service), so the breaking changes shouldn't matter. However, is it concerning that upgrading from v5 to v6 of common-types (as recommended by LintDiff) causes these breaking changes? When and how are real services supposed to upgrade their version of common-types?

@mikekistler
Copy link
Member

Yes it is concerning that v5->v6 results in these breaking change warnings, particularly that AddedRequiredProperty ones, which are only acceptable when the property was actually required and simply not marked as such, which I believe is the case here. It would be great if we could find a way to suppress these specific issues.

@mikeharder
Copy link
Member Author

mikeharder commented Aug 9, 2025

@mikekistler: Do you believe the v6 common-types should be updated to not be breaking, or that the breaking changes tool should be updated to not consider these changes as breaking? I can help drive this, but I'm still not sure exactly what or where the problem is.

@microsoft-github-policy-service microsoft-github-policy-service bot added the no-recent-activity There has been no recent activity on this issue. label Aug 25, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 25, 2025

Next Steps to Merge

Next steps that must be taken to merge this PR:
  • ❌ This PR is in purview of the ARM review (label: ARMReview). This PR must get ARMSignedOff label from an ARM reviewer.
    This PR is not ready for ARM review (label: NotReadyForARMReview). This PR will not be reviewed by ARM until relevant problems are fixed. Consult the rest of this Next Steps to Merge comment for details.
    Once the blocking problems are addressed, add to the PR a comment with contents /azp run. Automation will re-evaluate this PR and if everything looks good, it will add WaitForARMFeedback label which will put this PR on the ARM review queue.
    For details of the ARM review, see aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review
  • ❌ This PR is NotReadyForARMReview because it has the BreakingChangeReviewRequired label.
  • ❌ This PR has at least one breaking change (label: BreakingChangeReviewRequired).
    To unblock this PR, follow the process at aka.ms/brch.

Important checks have failed. As of today they are not blocking this PR, but in near future they may.
Addressing the following failures is highly recommended:
  • ⚠️ The check named Swagger BreakingChange has failed. To unblock this PR, follow the process at aka.ms/brch.


Comment generated by summarize-checks workflow run.

@microsoft-github-policy-service microsoft-github-policy-service bot removed the no-recent-activity There has been no recent activity on this issue. label Aug 25, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ARMReview BreakingChangeReviewRequired <valid label in PR review process>add this label when breaking change review is required NotReadyForARMReview resource-manager RPaaS TypeSpec Authored with TypeSpec
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants