Merging Managednetworkfabric/2025-07-15 API from RPSaaSMaster

[nnellikunnu]

ARM (Control Plane) API Specification Update Pull Request

Tip

Overwhelmed by all this guidance? See the Getting help section at the bottom of this PR description.

PR review workflow diagram

Please understand this diagram before proceeding. It explains how to get your PR approved & merged.

Purpose of this PR

What's the purpose of this PR? Check the specific option that applies. This is mandatory!

• New resource provider.
• New API version for an existing resource provider. (If API spec is not defined in TypeSpec, the PR should have been created in adherence to OpenAPI specs PR creation guidance).
• Update existing version for a new feature. (This is applicable only when you are revising a private preview API version.)
• Update existing version to fix OpenAPI spec quality issues in S360.
• Convert existing OpenAPI spec to TypeSpec spec (do not combine this with implementing changes for a new API version).
• Other, please clarify:
  • edit this with your clarification

Due diligence checklist

To merge this PR, you must go through the following checklist and confirm you understood
and followed the instructions by checking all the boxes:

• I confirm this PR is modifying Azure Resource Manager (ARM) related specifications, and not data plane related specifications.
• I have reviewed following Resource Provider guidelines, including
  ARM resource provider contract and
  REST guidelines (estimated time: 4 hours).
  I understand this is required before I can proceed to the diagram Step 2, "ARM API changes review", for this PR.
• A release plan has been created. If not, please create one as it will help guide you through the REST API and SDK creation process.

Additional information

Viewing API changes

For convenient view of the API changes made by this PR, refer to the URLs provided in the table
in the Generated ApiView comment added to this PR. You can use ApiView to show API versions diff.

Suppressing failures

If one or multiple validation error/warning suppression(s) is detected in your PR, please follow the
suppressions guide to get approval.

Getting help

• First, please carefully read through this PR description, from top to bottom. Please fill out the Purpose of this PR and Due diligence checklist.
• If you don't have permissions to remove or add labels to the PR, request write access per aka.ms/azsdk/access#request-access-to-rest-api-or-sdk-repositories
• To understand what you must do next to merge this PR, see the Next Steps to Merge comment. It will appear within few minutes of submitting this PR and will continue to be up-to-date with current PR state.
• For guidance on fixing this PR CI check failures, see the hyperlinks provided in given failure
  and https://aka.ms/ci-fix.
• For help with ARM review (PR workflow diagram Step 2), see https://aka.ms/azsdk/pr-arm-review.
• If the PR CI checks appear to be stuck in queued state, please add a comment with contents /azp run.
  This should result in a new comment denoting a PR validation pipeline has started and the checks should be updated after few minutes.
• If the help provided by the previous points is not enough, post to https://aka.ms/azsdk/support/specreview-channel and link to this PR.
• For guidance on SDK breaking change review, refer to https://aka.ms/ci-fix.

[github-actions]

Next Steps to Merge

Next steps that must be taken to merge this PR:

• ❌ Your PR has breaking changes in the generated SDK for Go (label: BreakingChange-Go-Sdk). Refer to step 3 in the PR workflow diagram.
• ❌ Your PR has breaking changes in the generated SDK for JavaScript (label: BreakingChange-JavaScript-Sdk). Refer to step 3 in the PR workflow diagram.
• ❌ Your PR has breaking changes in the generated SDK for Python (label: BreakingChange-Python-Sdk). Refer to step 3 in the PR workflow diagram.

Comment generated by summarize-checks workflow run.

[idanielsteven]

approved.

[tadelesh]

I saw lots of breaking changes from last stable because of patch models and sth. else. It that by design when you do the TypeSpec conversion?

[nnellikunnu]

I saw lots of breaking changes from last stable because of patch models and sth. else. It that by design when you do the TypeSpec conversion?

Ans: Yes, this is by design, and communicated to the customers.

[tadelesh]

@raych1 Could you help to check why this PR is not labeled with swagger breaking change?

[nnellikunnu]

@raych1 we had two preview API versions 2024-02-15-preview and 2024-06-15-preview API versions before the current versions 2025-07-15 API. I believe that the reason for Swagger did not report any breaking change

[mikeharder]

@mikeharder @mikekistler could you please guide me what with the next steps regarding this PR?

I added label BreakingChangeReviewRequired, because the claim is your spec does have breaking changes between the former stable and the version in this PR. It only wasn't detected by check Breaking Change(Cross-Version), since the files were merged and renamed.

This is an exceptional case, so our automation might remove label BreakingChangeReviewRequired, so I will block this PR with "changes requested" until we know breaking changes are approved.

[mikeharder]

Blocking until breaking changes are manually verified. Check Breaking Changes (Cross-Version) cannot detect changes if files are merged and/or renamed.

[github-actions]

API Change Check

APIView identified API level changes in this PR and created the following API reviews

Language	API Review for Package
Swagger	Microsoft.ManagedNetworkFabric
TypeSpec	Microsoft.ManagedNetworkFabric
Go	sdk/resourcemanager/managednetworkfabric/armmanagednetworkfabric
JavaScript	@azure/arm-managednetworkfabric
Java	com.azure.resourcemanager:azure-resourcemanager-managednetworkfabric
Python	azure-mgmt-managednetworkfabric

"Swagger Breaking Changes" were approved for initial TSP conversion, and "Cross-Version Breaking Changes" in this PR compared the latest stable (TSP) to the latest preview (TSP). So any breaking changes between latest stable and previous stable, should have already been reviewed transitively.

[mikeharder]

"Swagger Breaking Changes" were approved for initial TSP conversion (https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/pull/17974), and "Cross-Version Breaking Changes" in this PR compared the latest stable (TSP) to the latest preview (TSP). So any breaking changes between latest stable and previous stable, should have already been reviewed transitively.

[lirenhe]

We don't suggest adding new flatten properties, could you help to describe why you need to flatten this property here?

[pshao25]

Let's work together offline to deal with these breaking changes before proceeding.