Bryan Cook
Bryan Cook
Heard about this extension here: https://myignite.techcommunity.microsoft.com/sessions/87564?source=sessions The video refers to a private preview https://aka.ms/VaultPipelinesPreview
I'd be interested in taking a stab at this. I suspect the change is rather straightforward, but the learning curve might be the tests that you're using to test pester....
As a suggestion, could the definition be changed to: ```json { "area": "build", "id": "54572c7b-bbd3-45d4-80dc-28be08941620", "maxVersion": 6.0, "minVersion": 2.0, "releasedVersion": "5.1", "resourceName": "buildchanges", "resourceVersion": 2, "routeTemplate": "{project}/_apis/{area}/builds/{buildId}/changes" } ```
Perhaps an alternative would allow the author to provide the --id instead of using area + resource? ``` { "area": "build", "id": "54572c7b-bbd3-45d4-80dc-28be08941620", "maxVersion": 6.0, "minVersion": 2.0, "releasedVersion": "5.1", "resourceName":...
I'm happy to take #277 and #276. Probably within the next two weeks.
The fix for this was merged, can we cut a new release?
Can you provide a sample that caused the error?
That's an easy test to write. I'll open a PR
I opened the PR before I created the bugs. There is an exception, it just doesn't report the name of the missing parameter.
I think it would make sense to adapt/wrap the results of the template expansion so that we aren't allowing Exceptions from the .NET space to bubble up into the extension....