cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Weller <swel...@ena.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] API versioning
Date Mon, 05 Jun 2017 12:52:52 GMT

+1. Echoing what Rohit pointed out, we have a lot of cleanup to do :-) It certainly makes
it a lot easier though when you're not breaking compatibility with existing code.

________________________________
From: Rohit Yadav <rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com>
Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 4:04 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] API versioning

+1 Good idea, though bear in mind there are 500+ APIs with no modern-RESTful-standardization,
a lot of work.


Regards.

________________________________
From: Nitin Kumar Maharana <nitinkumar.maharana@accelerite.com>
Sent: 05 June 2017 12:37:24
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] API versioning

This looks good. +1

rohit.yadav@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
[http://shapeblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/sungardonline1.jpg]<http://www.shapeblue.com/>

Shapeblue - The CloudStack Company<http://www.shapeblue.com/>
www.shapeblue.com
The city of Prague was the venue for the spring meeting of the Cloudstack European user group.
There was



53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue



> On 04-Jun-2017, at 2:34 PM, Rene Moser <mail@renemoser.net> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I recently developed ansible modules for the ACL API and ... found this
> has a really inconsistent API naming. E.g.
>
> createNetworkACL <<-- this creates an ACL rule
> createNetworkACLList <<-- this create the ACL
>
> updateNetworkACLItem <<-- this updates an ACL rule
> updateNetworkACLList <<-- this updates the ACL
>
> My first thoughs was, someone has to fix this, like
>
> createNetworkAclRule <<-- this create the ACL rule
> createNetworkAcl <<-- this creates an ACL
>
> updateNetworkAclRule <<-- this updates the ACL rule
> updateNetworkAcl <<-- this updates an ACL
>
> But how without breaking the API for backwards compatibility? I know a
> few other places where the API has inconsistent namings. Fixing the API
> but in a controlled way? What about by adding a version to the API?
>
> I would like to introduce a API versioning to cloudstack: The current
> API would be frozen into verison v1. The new API will have v2. The
> versioned API has the URL scheme:
>
> /client/api/<version>
>
> The current API would be /client/api/v1 and the /client/api would be an
> alias for v1. This ensures backwards compatibility.
>
> This would allow us to deprecate and change APIs.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
>
>




DISCLAIMER
==========
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the property of Accelerite,
a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity
to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to
read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication
in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Accelerite, a Persistent
Systems business does not accept any liability for virus infected mails.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message