Mayank Aggarwal

Results 13 comments of Mayank Aggarwal

Hello ARM review team and Swagger Team, we have already completed the sign off process for these changes in private repo. Sharing link for the private sign off for fasten...

> > ``` > > "description": "Gets or sets the volume snapshot property.", > > ``` > > More useful documentation please. Property documentation shouldn't just be "Gets or sets...

> > ``` > > "description": "Parameters for Kubernetes Cluster Backup Datasource", > > ``` > > Is Datasource consistently one word in your docs, or two? > > Refers...

> > ``` > > "readOnly": false > > ``` > > What are the valid values? > > Refers to: specification/dataprotection/resource-manager/Microsoft.DataProtection/preview/2022-10-01-preview/dataprotection.json:4857 in [a17cfd3](https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/commit/a17cfd3e469cc425902ceaa3ca8cd18ba7d65005). [](commit_id = [a17cfd3](https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/commit/a17cfd3e469cc425902ceaa3ca8cd18ba7d65005), deletion_comment = False)...

> > ``` > > "discriminator": "objectType" > > ``` > > In top level resource APIs I've seen discriminator fields called things like 'kind', I'm not sure if we...

> > ``` > > "description": "Gets or sets the volume snapshot property.", > > ``` > > The property name also doesn't sound very intuitively boolean. And I wonder...

> > ``` > > "description": "Gets or sets the LabelSelectors property. This property sets the resource with such label selectors to be included during restore.", > > ``` >...

> > ``` > > } > > ``` > > These properties are duplicated across models, could you reduce the duplication, and clarify that they have the same meaning,...

> > ``` > > "discriminator": "objectType" > > ``` > > I see you have precedence for calling this objectType already. Let's keep it the same. > > In...

Please see comments above. Also to add again we have already take the approval for the same swagger from ARM team in this pull request: https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/pull/8805 --- In reply to:...