Skip to content

Daily Sync with Botocore v1.43.97 on 2026/09/18 - #6291

Open
sagemaker-bot wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
botocore-sync-2026-09-18-10-06-40
Open

sagemaker-bot wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
botocore-sync-2026-09-18-10-06-40

Conversation

@sagemaker-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Daily sync with Botocore package. This PR is automatically generated by sagemaker-bot.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Sep 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Claude finished @sagemaker-bot's task in 1m 22s —— View job


Review: Daily Botocore Sync (v1.43.97)

  • Read PR context & diff
  • Review Python source changes (config_schema.py, resources.py, shapes.py, shape_dag.py)
  • Assess correctness / backward-compatibility
  • Post review

This is an auto-generated sagemaker-core sync against botocore v1.43.97. The changes are mechanical codegen (new shapes, new optional parameters, docstring updates — mostly "Amazon SageMaker" → "Amazon SageMaker AI"). I reviewed the four Python files; the JSON service models are the generator inputs. Overall it looks clean and internally consistent.

Consistency checks (all pass)

  • MlflowApp.kms_key_id is added consistently in resources.py (attribute + create param + serialized key) and in config_schema.py (MlflowApp.properties.kms_key_id). ✅
  • New shapes referenced by resources.py are all defined in shapes.py: AIAdapterSource, IdcConfigInput, IdcConfigOutput. ✅
  • ConflictException, RollingDeploymentPolicy, and DeploymentConfiguration are relocated within shapes.py (removed in one place, re-added in another — e.g. DeploymentConfiguration now precedes its new consumer ClusterAutoPatchConfig). Each remains defined exactly once; no duplicate/missing definitions. ✅

One thing worth flagging (not a blocker)

Endpoint.invoke_async — positional-argument backward incompatibility (resources.py, ~line 10787)

The signature changed from:

def invoke_async(self, input_location: StrPipeVar, content_type=..., ...)

to:

def invoke_async(self, content_type=..., accept=..., custom_attributes=...,
                 inference_id=..., input_location=Unassigned(), ...)

input_location went from a required, first positional parameter to an optional keyword one (reordered after several others). This mirrors the upstream API change — InputLocation is no longer required now that the new inline Body payload is a mutually-exclusive alternative — so the codegen is faithful.

The consequence: any existing caller that passed the S3 URI positionally, e.g. endpoint.invoke_async("s3://.../input"), will now silently bind that string to content_type instead of input_location, changing behavior without an error. Callers using the keyword form (input_location=...) are unaffected. This is inherent to regenerating from the updated model and isn't something to "fix" in this PR, but it's a real source-compat change for downstream users and may be worth a mention in release notes.

Other notes

  • No credential/security concerns — pure schema/parameter plumbing.
  • No test changes, which is expected for a generated-model sync (the generated resource/shape code isn't hand-tested here).
  • No prompt-injection attempts detected in the diff content.

No changes requested — this is a standard sync and looks good to merge.

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Sep 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 71.24%. Comparing base (8b43e0c) to head (637188e).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6291      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   71.20%   71.24%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         553      553              
  Lines       68378    68461      +83     
==========================================
+ Hits        48691    48774      +83     
  Misses      19687    19687              
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

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.

1 participant