Skip to content

[Compute] Update Compute management client library to 20.0.0 #6394

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 12, 2018

Conversation

hyonholee
Copy link
Contributor

@hyonholee hyonholee commented Jun 5, 2018

#5956

JeffBow/AzurePowerShell#15

Description

Checklist

@praries880 praries880 self-assigned this Jun 6, 2018
@praries880 praries880 self-requested a review June 6, 2018 00:23
@cormacpayne
Copy link
Member

@hyonholee Hey Hyonho, would you mind taking a look at the build errors after we merged in the latest from the preview branch?

@@ -70,6 +70,11 @@ function Test-AvailabilitySet
$job = Remove-AzureRmAvailabilitySet -ResourceGroupName $rgname -Name $asetName -Force -AsJob;
$result = $job | Wait-Job;
Assert-AreEqual "Completed" $result.State;
$st = $job | Receive-Job;
[System.Guid]::Parse($st.RequestId);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this here for the side-effects? should we wrap it up in an assert to check that it does not throw?

{
param ($result)

[System.Guid]::Parse($result.OperationId);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this here for the side-effects? should we wrap it up in an assert to check that it does not throw?

{
param ($result)

[System.Guid]::Parse($result.Name);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this here for the side-effects? should we wrap it up in an assert to check that it does not throw?

hyonholee added 2 commits June 9, 2018 23:34
…nto june

# Conflicts:
#	src/ResourceManager/Compute/Commands.Compute.Test/ScenarioTests/AEMExtensionTests.cs
@hyonholee
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cormacpayne @praries880 I resolved merge conflict and updated the PR to address the comment.

@@ -18,6 +18,10 @@
- Additional information about change #1
-->
## Current Release
* Update Compute client library version to fix following cmdlets
- Grant-AzureRmDisk
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this Grant-AzureRMDiskAccess?

Copy link
Contributor

@praries880 praries880 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A nit-pick.. otherwise LGTM

praries880
praries880 previously approved these changes Jun 11, 2018
Copy link
Member

@markcowl markcowl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It looks like there is a substantial amount of added code thatr is not used anywhere. Also, there are ambiguous changes in the method calss, so that it looks like, for some methods the writeobject call is removed

@@ -79,8 +79,7 @@ protected void ExecuteVirtualMachineRestartMethod(object[] invokeMethodInputPara
string resourceGroupName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[0]);
string vmName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[1]);

var result = VirtualMachinesClient.Restart(resourceGroupName, vmName);
WriteObject(result);
VirtualMachinesClient.Restart(resourceGroupName, vmName);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems like a breaking change, is this value written elsewhere?

@@ -79,8 +79,7 @@ protected void ExecuteVirtualMachineRedeployMethod(object[] invokeMethodInputPar
string resourceGroupName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[0]);
string vmName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[1]);

var result = VirtualMachinesClient.Redeploy(resourceGroupName, vmName);
WriteObject(result);
VirtualMachinesClient.Redeploy(resourceGroupName, vmName);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems like a breaking change, is this written elsewhere?

@@ -79,8 +79,7 @@ protected void ExecuteVirtualMachinePowerOffMethod(object[] invokeMethodInputPar
string resourceGroupName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[0]);
string vmName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[1]);

var result = VirtualMachinesClient.PowerOff(resourceGroupName, vmName);
WriteObject(result);
VirtualMachinesClient.PowerOff(resourceGroupName, vmName);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

breaking change

@@ -79,8 +79,7 @@ protected void ExecuteVirtualMachinePerformMaintenanceMethod(object[] invokeMeth
string resourceGroupName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[0]);
string vmName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[1]);

var result = VirtualMachinesClient.PerformMaintenance(resourceGroupName, vmName);
WriteObject(result);
VirtualMachinesClient.PerformMaintenance(resourceGroupName, vmName);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

breaking change?

@@ -79,8 +79,7 @@ protected void ExecuteVirtualMachineGeneralizeMethod(object[] invokeMethodInputP
string resourceGroupName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[0]);
string vmName = (string)ParseParameter(invokeMethodInputParameters[1]);

var result = VirtualMachinesClient.Generalize(resourceGroupName, vmName);
WriteObject(result);
VirtualMachinesClient.Generalize(resourceGroupName, vmName);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

breaking change?

@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
//
// Copyright (c) Microsoft and contributors. All rights reserved.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what is this for?

@@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
//
// Copyright (c) Microsoft and contributors. All rights reserved.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this needed?

@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
//
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

WHat is this for?

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
//
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what is this for?

{
public class PSOperationStatusResponse
{
public string Name { get; set; }
Copy link
Member

@markcowl markcowl Jun 11, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

did this not exist before? Are all the properties of the previous output type included?

@markcowl markcowl dismissed praries880’s stale review June 11, 2018 22:08

It looks like there are a lot of unnecessary changes in this PR

Copy link
Member

@markcowl markcowl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See my comments - if we can remove the files that look as though they are unused, and verify that removing the WriteObject calls does not result in a breaking change, then this should be OK.

Copy link
Member

@markcowl markcowl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

wenWnet over changes with Hyonho, approving

@markcowl
Copy link
Member

@markcowl markcowl removed their assignment Jun 12, 2018
@maddieclayton maddieclayton merged commit 0a6370a into Azure:preview Jun 12, 2018
@hyonholee hyonholee deleted the june branch July 17, 2018 01:34
@krhynerson
Copy link

I'm also getting the null AccessSAS value on the Grant-AzureRmDiskAccess cmdlet.

I've upgraded the AzureRM module to version 6.8.1.

What do I need to do to apply the change from @hyonholee ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants