Adding a legacy Required properties resource mix models #833
Conversation
allenjzhang
requested review from
bterlson,
markcowl and
timotheeguerin
as code owners
|
❌ There is undocummented changes. Run The following packages have changes but are not documented.
Show changes |
…zhang_addRequiredProperties
|
|
||
| namespace Azure.ResourceManager.Legacy; | ||
|
|
||
| //#region Standard Resource Operation Interfaces |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do we supprot region in tsp?
| @doc("Concrete tracked resource types can be created by aliasing this type using a specific property type.") | ||
| @armResourceInternal(Properties) | ||
| @includeInapplicableMetadataInPayload(false) | ||
| model TrackedResourceWithRequiredProperties<Properties extends {}> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we put #deprecated on all of those or have a linting rule against using them?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel the namespace being legacy which has good separation. It is targeted for brownfield. Unless ARM has disallowed required properties (currently they don't) we probably don't want to put deprecate.
| @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ | |||
| using TypeSpec.Http; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For legacy, I think we are still leaving out scenarios where folks extend Resource or EntityResource. I would prefer it if we just let them extend a common-types resource type, and added a new decorator they would need to decorate the type with that is the equivalent of @armResourceInternal and @includeInapplicableMetadataInPayload, and relax the rules around extension to include this case.
|
|
||
| namespace Azure.ResourceManager.Legacy; | ||
|
|
||
| //#region Standard Resource Operation Interfaces |
| @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ model ResourceNameParameter< | |||
| @armResourceInternal(Properties) | |||
| @includeInapplicableMetadataInPayload(false) | |||
| model TrackedResource<Properties extends {}> extends Foundations.TrackedResource { | |||
| @doc("The resource-specific properties for this resource.") | |||
| @doc("The resource-specific optional properties for this resource.") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think these doc updates are necessary. The typespec and the swagger already say it is optional, adding the documentation makes swagger changes without adding any information.
|
This PR is ON HOLD until the discussion of @visibility design issues.. |
Putting in a separate namespace avoid name conflict.
#131