Skip to content

Conversation

shanefujs
Copy link
Member

SDK configuration pull request

Purpose of this PR

  • Make changes to the SDK configuration only when there are no modifications to the API specification, eliminating the need for an ARM or Stewardship Board API review.

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:

Getting help

  • First, carefully read through this PR description, from top to bottom. Fill out the Purpose of this PR and Due diligence checklist.
  • If you don't have permissions to remove or add labels to the PR, request write access per aka.ms/azsdk/access#request-access-to-rest-api-or-sdk-repositories
  • To understand what you must do next to merge this PR, see the 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.
  • For guidance on fixing this PR CI check failures, see the hyperlinks provided in given failure and https://aka.ms/ci-fix.
  • If the PR CI checks appear to be stuck in 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.
  • If the help provided by the previous points is not enough, post to https://aka.ms/azsdk/support/specreview-channel and link to this PR.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2025

Next Steps to Merge

✅ All automated merging requirements have been met! To get your PR merged, see aka.ms/azsdk/specreview/merge.

Comment generated by summarize-checks workflow run.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the TypeSpec Authored with TypeSpec label Oct 3, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2025

API Change Check

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

Language API Review for Package
TypeSpec Microsoft.StorageDiscovery

@shanefujs shanefujs force-pushed the main branch 5 times, most recently from 4d651f2 to dfcc33f Compare October 6, 2025 19:57
Copy link
Contributor

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

This PR makes C# SDK client name changes for the Storage Discovery Management service by adding @clientName decorators for two additional types and updating dependency versions in the TypeSpec specification.

Key changes:

  • Added @useDependency decorators for Azure Resource Manager versions in the API version enum
  • Added @clientName decorators for StorageDiscoveryResourceType and StorageDiscoveryWorkspacePropertiesUpdate types
  • Imported the new client.tsp file into main.tsp

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

File Description
specification/storagediscovery/Microsoft.StorageDiscovery.Management/versions.tsp Added @useDependency decorators for Azure Resource Manager versions
specification/storagediscovery/Microsoft.StorageDiscovery.Management/main.tsp Added import for the new client.tsp file
specification/storagediscovery/Microsoft.StorageDiscovery.Management/client.tsp Added C# client name mappings and removed unnecessary main.tsp import

@shanefujs shanefujs removed the TypeSpec Authored with TypeSpec label Oct 6, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added TypeSpec Authored with TypeSpec ARMReview resource-manager RPaaS WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required labels Oct 6, 2025
@Azure Azure deleted a comment from Copilot AI Oct 6, 2025
@shanefujs shanefujs removed WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required ARMReview resource-manager RPaaS labels Oct 6, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
TypeSpec Authored with TypeSpec
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant