Skip to content
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

add RMFR8 - Category: Composition - End-of-life resource versions #1419

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

matebarabas
Copy link
Contributor

Overview/Summary

RMFR8 - Category: Composition - End-of-life resource versions

This PR fixes/adds/changes/removes

  1. RMFR8 - Category: Composition - End-of-life resource versions

Breaking Changes

n/a

As part of this Pull Request I have

  • Read the Contribution Guide and ensured this PR is compliant with the guide
  • Checked for duplicate Pull Requests
  • Associated it with relevant GitHub Issues or ADO Work Items (Internal Only)
  • Ensured my code/branch is up-to-date with the latest changes in the main branch
  • Ensured PR tests are passing
  • Updated relevant and associated documentation (e.g. Contribution Guide, Docs etc.)

@matebarabas matebarabas requested a review from a team as a code owner September 20, 2024 03:06
@matebarabas matebarabas self-assigned this Sep 20, 2024
@microsoft-github-policy-service microsoft-github-policy-service bot added the Needs: Triage 🔍 Maintainers need to triage still label Sep 20, 2024

Important

The "Needs: Triage 🔍" label must be removed once the triage process is complete!

Tip

For additional guidance on how to triage this issue/PR, see the AVM Issue Triage documentation.

@matebarabas matebarabas added Type: Documentation 📄 Improvements or additions to documentation and removed Needs: Triage 🔍 Maintainers need to triage still labels Sep 20, 2024
Copy link
Member

@matt-FFFFFF matt-FFFFFF left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Some more suggestions

When a given version of an Azure resource used in a resource module reaches its end-of-life (EOL) and is no longer supported by Microsoft, the module owner **MUST** ensure that:

1. The module is aligned with these changes and only includes supported versions of the resource. (This is typically achieved through the allowed values in the parameter that specifies the resource version.)
2. The following notice is shown under the `Notes` section of the module's `readme.md`. (If any related public announcement is available, it can also be linked to from the Notes section.):
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this would be much better in the releases section. After a while this change will be commonplace and not needed in a readme file.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you please clarify which releases section you're referring to? I agree to your point this information becoming obsolete over time and having a good practice for handling its relevance accordingly - but the notes section might be the most obvious place for this that is attached directly to the module. Also, having the blurb in both point 2 and 3 was agreed on in our weekly call, so I would just go with it. To incorporate your PoV though, I think we could add a time stamp and/or mention the version, so it is clear. What do you think?

docs/content/specs-defs/specs/shared/_index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
2. The following notice is shown under the `Notes` section of the module's `readme.md`. (If any related public announcement is available, it can also be linked to from the Notes section.):
> "Certain versions of this Azure resource reached their end of life. The latest version of this module only includes supported versions of the resource. All unsupported versions have been removed from the related parameters."
3. AND the related parameter's description:
> "Certain versions of this Azure resource reached their end of life. The latest version of this module only includes supported versions of the resource. All unsupported versions have been removed from this parameter."
Copy link
Member

@matt-FFFFFF matt-FFFFFF Oct 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think number 3 is necessary.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This was also agreed on internally, I just ended up being the one writing it down. :) I think having it in the parameter makes sense, as there's no way not to see it - this was probably the main argument of whoever came up with it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Type: Documentation 📄 Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants