Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A7ADC9176 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 16:10:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 6038 invoked by uid 500); 2 Aug 2012 16:10:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cloudstack-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 6006 invoked by uid 500); 2 Aug 2012 16:10:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 5996 invoked by uid 99); 2 Aug 2012 16:10:50 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 16:10:50 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ferncam1@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.43] (HELO mail-wg0-f43.google.com) (74.125.82.43) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 16:10:44 +0000 Received: by wgbdr1 with SMTP id dr1so6826861wgb.0 for ; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 09:10:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=dzAcASscY9/c/VWQK4naL9gAD8zBeGKZL2NRLfFcdzU=; b=OWOdmvPhLErHlAGDxNXV28Xuokcid6Xgk0472RtLOAgNAWLzIyJwoEjnTKQj0zeuRE e7r4HM4Ybmrz8X3KwTeazT2uRO7A9bAwzYtQ3ZRyNxuMlPeffTcB53cB1VB7sH3q2zIK eaU+GuSoXtSOoEkwPzSsoDS4hywNpG5qBja2jYmKomYECfjk3LRdLz+0XRvwxVgO+qNr LKXZ7++jIFJYLt5ABBpkib84IowGohQ/1yEg8bJOXLIQX/HsNlgjb7HDLAC1E8Cfju1D j3CY+eK08lmhuU7Ph9HC1dg9mVY7FadOsxCdyoys43oh8YBai2jwjpCtKjm2tABVt7HA AiaQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.219.162 with SMTP id pp2mr4666414igc.40.1343923823240; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 09:10:23 -0700 (PDT) Sender: ferncam1@gmail.com Received: by 10.64.40.134 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Aug 2012 09:10:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <6005BE083BF501439A84DC3523BAC82DE44D7E3DFF@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net> Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 09:10:23 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: RLWjWnm6gqmf1VMJo9Bonte8QKE Message-ID: Subject: Re: ec2 API compatibility (WSDL vs Query) From: Adrian Cole To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Cc: Prachi Damle Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9340e0516e67d04c64aa614 --14dae9340e0516e67d04c64aa614 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 If the Query API isn't tested well, this is also an issue. Since EC2 ecosystem by-in-large don't use SOAP interfaces, any faults in the Query API should be treated with higher priority, than SOAP anyway. I'm happy to help testing the Query interface, especially if it gets us closer to deleting the SOAP one. -A On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Chip Childers wrote: > From Chiradeep's note: > > > Currently the EC2 API layer implements both the WSDL interface as well as > > the Query API. > > However the Query API is not well tested. > > So removing the SOAP interface would leave us with the query API... > which would then need testing. > > Am I misunderstanding? > > -chip > > On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Ewan Mellor > wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com] > >> Sent: 02 August 2012 07:58 > >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: ec2 API compatibility (WSDL vs Query) > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Adrian Cole > >> wrote: > >> > Just curious. > >> > > >> > If this is the first apache release, and cloudbridge was formerly in a > >> > different repo, why don't we just rip out the SOAP interface? That's > >> > a heck of a lot simpler than deprecating the first version of > something. > >> > > >> > -A > >> > >> I think we are saying the same thing. In this case, deprecate = rip it > out. > > > > Are we saying that? We've got 6 working days of general development > time before we start locking down for a release. Can we get the query API > implemented in that time? > > > > Regarding the specific licensing issue, Prachi is looking at what > happens when we remove the WSDLs. The server stubs are already in the code > base, so in theory we shouldn't need the WSDLs to be present anyway. > Prachi is looking at whether that's true. > > > > Ewan. > > > > > --14dae9340e0516e67d04c64aa614--