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

Include the available role sizes from locations #22

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 29, 2015

Conversation

jen20
Copy link
Contributor

@jen20 jen20 commented Jan 29, 2015

Previously the locations client did not return information about the available role sizes in each location. This commit adds two additional properties to the LocationList type to expose a list of Web/Worker role sizes and VM sizes available per region. Since the data is already returned by the API endpoint no API call changes are required.

Previously the locations client did not return information about the
available role sizes in each location. This commit adds two additional
properties to the LocationList type to expose a list of Web/Worker role
sizes and VM sizes available per region. Since the data is already
returned by the API endpoint no API call changes are required.
ruslangabitov added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 29, 2015
Include the available role sizes from locations
@ruslangabitov ruslangabitov merged commit 30f842a into Azure:dev Jan 29, 2015
@jen20 jen20 deleted the location-client-vm-sizes branch January 29, 2015 20:38
@jen20
Copy link
Contributor Author

jen20 commented Jan 29, 2015

👍, thanks for merging!

@ahmetb
Copy link
Contributor

ahmetb commented Jan 29, 2015

we should probably delete dev branch unless necessary. (do we use it as a default destination for PRs?)

@jen20
Copy link
Contributor Author

jen20 commented Jan 29, 2015

Agreed, direct into master would be an improvement. Have a number of patches over the next day or two.

@ruslangabitov
Copy link
Contributor

@ahmetalpbalkan well it was meant for that, but since no one is using it, we can just work in master branch)

@ruslangabitov
Copy link
Contributor

@jen20 thanks for contributing.

marstr pushed a commit to marstr/azure-sdk-for-go that referenced this pull request Apr 27, 2017
* Blobs as receivers, divided blob file

* Got rid of extraHeaders on AppendBlob

* Progress on general blob operations

* Got rid of all extraheaders in general blob operations

* Got rid of extraheaders in blockblob

* Cuter looking APIs for copy blob

* Cuter (more complete) looking APIs for lease blob

* Got rid of extraheaders in pageblob

* More complete container requests

* Better use structToHeaders

* Added headersFromStruct to other places and types

* Coments from review

* Fix tests

* More feedback
marstr pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2017
* Blobs as receivers, divided blob file

* Got rid of extraHeaders on AppendBlob

* Progress on general blob operations

* Got rid of all extraheaders in general blob operations

* Got rid of extraheaders in blockblob

* Cuter looking APIs for copy blob

* Cuter (more complete) looking APIs for lease blob

* Got rid of extraheaders in pageblob

* More complete container requests

* Better use structToHeaders

* Added headersFromStruct to other places and types

* Coments from review

* Fix tests

* More feedback
mcardosos added a commit that referenced this pull request May 4, 2017
* Blobs as receivers, divided blob file

* Got rid of extraHeaders on AppendBlob

* Progress on general blob operations

* Got rid of all extraheaders in general blob operations

* Got rid of extraheaders in blockblob

* Cuter looking APIs for copy blob

* Cuter (more complete) looking APIs for lease blob

* Got rid of extraheaders in pageblob

* More complete container requests

* Better use structToHeaders

* Added headersFromStruct to other places and types

* Coments from review

* Fix tests

* More feedback
richardpark-msft pushed a commit to richardpark-msft/azure-sdk-for-go that referenced this pull request Aug 5, 2021
countdetails included. Cant get tests running locally
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants