- [YES] I have added an explanation of what changes in this merge do and why we should include it?
- [YES] I have updated the documentation accordingly.
- [NO] I have added tests to cover my changes.
- [YES] All new and existing tests passed.
- [YES] My code follows the code style of this project.
- [YES] I ran lint checks locally prior to submission.
What is the issue or story related to the change?
The idea is to have common code even for the SignedURL generation. Using BlockBlobClient is safer approach as it takes care of encoding related aspects and in every service where the Signed URLs are required.
Handling construction of URLs in service level could very well lead to Double Encoding issues.
High level design:
Does this introduce a breaking change?
- Please provide an ETA when you plan to review this MR. Write a comment to decline or provide an ETA.
- Block the MR if you feel there is less testing or no details in the MR
- Please cover the following aspects in the MR -- Coding design: <Reviewer1> -- Backward Compatibility: <Reviewer2> -- Feature Logic: <Logic design> -- <Any other context mention here> OR -- <Component 1>: <Reviewer1> -- <CosmosDB>: <Reviewer2> -- <ServiceBus> <Reviewer3> -- <Mention any other component and owner>