nacx commented on this pull request.
> +import org.jclouds.json.SerializedNames;
+
+import com.google.auto.value.AutoValue;
+
+@AutoValue
+public abstract class LoadBalancerSKU {
+
+ public static enum LoadBalancerSKUName {
+ Basic, Standard, Unrecognized;
+
+ public static LoadBalancerSKUName fromValue(final String text) {
+ return (LoadBalancerSKUName) GetEnumValue.fromValueOrDefault(text,
LoadBalancerSKUName.Unrecognized);
+ }
+ }
+
+ @Nullable
I don't think this is nullable. Can the only field in the object be null?
> + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+package org.jclouds.azurecompute.arm.domain;
+
+import org.jclouds.azurecompute.arm.util.GetEnumValue;
+import org.jclouds.javax.annotation.Nullable;
+import org.jclouds.json.SerializedNames;
+
+import com.google.auto.value.AutoValue;
+
+@AutoValue
+public abstract class LoadBalancerSKU {
+
+ public static enum LoadBalancerSKUName {
Just call it `Name` and reference it as `LoadBalancerSKU.Name`.
> + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+package org.jclouds.azurecompute.arm.domain;
+
+import org.jclouds.azurecompute.arm.util.GetEnumValue;
+import org.jclouds.javax.annotation.Nullable;
+import org.jclouds.json.SerializedNames;
+
+import com.google.auto.value.AutoValue;
+
+@AutoValue
+public abstract class PublicAddressSKU {
+
+ public static enum PublicIPAddressSkuName {
Same naming pattern as above.
> +import org.jclouds.json.SerializedNames;
+
+import com.google.auto.value.AutoValue;
+
+@AutoValue
+public abstract class PublicAddressSKU {
+
+ public static enum PublicIPAddressSkuName {
+ Basic, Standard, Unrecognized;
+
+ public static PublicIPAddressSkuName fromValue(final String text) {
+ return (PublicIPAddressSkuName) GetEnumValue.fromValueOrDefault(text,
PublicIPAddressSkuName.Unrecognized);
+ }
+ }
+
+ @Nullable
Probably this is not nullable.
> @@ -68,7 +69,7 @@
@MapBinder(BindToJsonPayload.class)
LoadBalancer createOrUpdate(@PathParam("loadbalancername") String lbName,
@PayloadParam("location") String location, @Nullable
@PayloadParam("tags") Map<String, String> tags,
- @PayloadParam("properties") LoadBalancerProperties properties);
+ @PayloadParam("properties") LoadBalancerProperties properties,
@Nullable @PayloadParam("sku") LoadBalancerSKU sku);
Leave the properties parameter at the end. That is more aligned with the style
of all other APIs and methods.
> @@ -66,9 +67,9 @@
@MapBinder(BindToJsonPayload.class)
@PUT
PublicIPAddress createOrUpdate(@PathParam("publicipaddressname") String
publicipaddressname,
- @PayloadParam("location")
String location,
- @Nullable
@PayloadParam("tags") Map<String, String> tags,
- @PayloadParam("properties")
PublicIPAddressProperties properties);
+ @PayloadParam("location") String location, @Nullable
@PayloadParam("tags") Map<String, String> tags,
+ @PayloadParam("properties") PublicIPAddressProperties properties,
+ @Nullable @PayloadParam("sku") PublicAddressSKU sku);
Same comment, keep the properties object at the end.
> @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+/*
You probably can embed this type in the LoadBalancer type. It only makes sense
inside the LB and naming is more meaningful as you just do `LoadBalancer.SKU`.
Up to you.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/1264#pullrequestreview-185425295
