Tim Lovell-Smith
Tim Lovell-Smith
> "x-ms-azure-resource": true If this is a proxy resource represented elsewhere in the API, then you can inherit "allOf" ProxyResource from common-types Otherwise, I believe this tag shouldn't be there....
> "x-ms-azure-resource": true Should be [ARMBlockingComment] if this were this a new API: x-ms-azure-resource tag shouldn't be added on the 'properties' property bag deifnition! Please remove it, if you can...
> "x-ms-azure-resource": true Remove this. --- Refers to: specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/stable/2024-02-01/cdn.json:5642 in dafbb66. [](commit_id = dafbb66d086ca156bd0b5f23e7a946dd2ce41431, deletion_comment = False)
> }, Please remove these definitions of 'Resource' and 'ProxyReosurce', and everywhere you reference them, instead inherit "allOf", from ProxyResource, TrackedResoruce, or Resource in common-types types.json ../../../../../common-types/resource-management/v6/types.json](https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/main/specification/common-types/resource-management/v6/types.json) --- Refers to:...
> }, Please remove these and everywhere you reference them, instead inherit "allOf", from ProxyResource, TrackedResource, or Resource in common-types' types.json ../../../../../common-types/resource-management/v6/types.json](https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/main/specification/common-types/resource-management/v6/types.json) --- Refers to: specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/stable/2024-02-01/cdn.json:7082 in dafbb66. [](commit_id =...
> "PrivateEndpointStatus": { Is there a reason you didn't use the definition here? Is this not following the normal private link integration pattern? (I notice the common types version does...
> }, Consider removing these and instead referencing the ErrorResponse definitions from common-types. This feedback is more like 'optional' at this point, in case its breaking. --- Refers to: specification/cdn/resource-manager/Microsoft.Cdn/stable/2024-02-01/cdn.json:7225...
> } Optional, but since you're already making SDK breaking changes.... For sake of consistency with other RPs and reviewability, I would like to recommend removing these parameter definitions from...
How is it completed? Seems like a good issue to leave open to the community to fix to me. I assume FlushAll is non-controversial to support, as an easy enhancement...
@emmeliaAra please finish due diligence section