Add cg profile api v2
Add CGProfile API specifications in a new version
PR validation pipeline can not start as the pull request is not merged or mergeable - most likely it has merge conflicts.
PR validation pipeline can not start as the pull request is not merged or mergeable - most likely it has merge conflicts.
PR validation pipeline can not start as the pull request is not merged or mergeable - most likely it has merge conflicts.
Next Steps to Merge
Next steps that must be taken to merge this PR:- ❌ This is the public specs repo
mainbranch which is not intended for iterative development.
You must acknowledge that you understand that after this PR is merged, you won't be able to stop your changes from being published to Azure customers.
If this is what you intend, addPublishToCustomerslabel to your PR.
Otherwise, retarget this PR onto a feature branch, i.e. with prefixrelease-(see aka.ms/azsdk/api-versions#release--branches). - ❌ This PR is in purview of the ARM review (label:
ARMReview). This PR must getARMSignedOfflabel from an ARM reviewer.
This PR hasARMChangesRequestedlabel. Please address or respond to feedback from the ARM API reviewer.
When you are ready to continue the ARM API review, please remove theARMChangesRequestedlabel.
Automation should then addWaitForARMFeedbacklabel.
❗If you don't have permissions to remove the label, requestwrite accessper aka.ms/azsdk/access#request-access-to-rest-api-or-sdk-repositories.
For details of the ARM review, see aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review - ❌ The required check named
Swagger PrettierCheckhas failed. Refer to the check in the PR's 'Checks' tab for details on how to fix it and consult the aka.ms/ci-fix guide
Generated ApiView
| Language | Package Name | ApiView Link |
|---|---|---|
| Go | sdk/resourcemanager/containerinstance/armcontainerinstance | https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/94480d0264ec4820b781f6275cf6a7a8?revisionId=dda5956b2c8e4c45868fcf0276257706 |
| Java | azure-resourcemanager-containerinstance-generated | https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/e709fb4537c54c90a1f2c1e18ba101ab?revisionId=b90366af15594ab28ccfca38de0e5f72 |
| Python | azure-mgmt-containerinstance | https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/4dce4e3df4be4bb69febf7dcc125bee0?revisionId=c43771bd4cd84187963f0de7302b45cb |
| JavaScript | @azure/arm-containerinstance | https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/ad27d08d33da42e195cb6b43c7dc4b68?revisionId=93f0fc3ef9794eabab7c8ddadd56e0d6 |
| Swagger | Microsoft.ContainerInstance | https://apiview.dev/Assemblies/Review/57ed6af1fd4140b5b89c9b62c962949f?revisionId=1e45bc8b1a3c41b48f4efaa9a360ecd9 |
can you please fix the Lint diff errors : https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/pull/30874/checks?check_run_id=31188511734
"$ref": "#/definitions/Resource"
use the tracked resource definition from common types and remove all other top level definitions from the object
Refers to: specification/containerinstance/resource-manager/Microsoft.ContainerInstance/preview/2024-11-01-preview/containerInstance.json:3348 in 9e43e2e. [](commit_id = 9e43e2e2afa147bdb377acb7b5b75f7099023401, deletion_comment = False)
"NGroupIdentity": {
use commontypes definition
Refers to: specification/containerinstance/resource-manager/Microsoft.ContainerInstance/preview/2024-11-01-preview/containerInstance.json:3353 in 9e43e2e. [](commit_id = 9e43e2e2afa147bdb377acb7b5b75f7099023401, deletion_comment = False)
"$ref": "#/definitions/Resource"use the tracked resource definition from common types and remove all other top level definitions from the object
Refers to: specification/containerinstance/resource-manager/Microsoft.ContainerInstance/preview/2024-11-01-preview/containerInstance.json:3348 in 9e43e2e. [](commit_id = 9e43e2e, deletion_comment = False)
The JSON is required by internal customers to see the swagger UI. Hence the references are limited to this file only. For future when we make this to public stable version then we can make these references to common types.
Can you please fix the newly introduced Lintdiff warnings : https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/pull/30874/checks?check_run_id=32564480702
could you also please fix the older comments I had provided before restarting the ARM review ?