Hi all, Yes it is better to avoid UUID and expect endpoint key. Currently when adding an API it check whether UUID is exist and is it unique. If not add API is fail. So we can use the same approach when importing a API.
Also another solution would be when exporting a API, we can include the endpoint configuration there. If the endpoint key is not present in the new environment we can add endpoint and import API successfully. Thanks and Regards On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Malintha Amarasinghe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Malintha Amarasinghe <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I also believe having UUIDs to define EPs to APIs is problematic. If we >> move the same API to different environment, the auto wiring of EPs will not >> work because their EP UUIDs are different. So +1 to have a EP key or a name >> to refer EPs from APIs since this is a specific use case. >> >> Thanks! >> >> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Isuru Haththotuwa <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> The APIM team had an offline discussion on $subject. >>> >>> Currently in APIM C5 code, the UUID is considered as the unique id for >>> an Endpoint, and the UUID is dynamically generated. The API definition >>> needs to refer this endpoint ID. Hence we need to add endpoints before >>> adding an API (Since the endpoint id is known only after creating and >>> Endpoint). >>> >> >>> Additionally, this will cause problems in automating the API management >>> flows and moving APIs across environments as well; Endpoint ids will be >>> different from environment to environment. Therefore would need to edit the >>> API definitions and change the endpoint ids before they are added to the >>> new environments. >>> >>> On the other hand, if the Endpoint is referred by its name, and API does >>> not have to depend on the Endpoint being available at the time of API >>> creation. API and Endpoint resource can be created in any order, thus >>> reducing the coupling between two resources. >>> >> However it is doubtful to me whether it is ok to allow non existing EP > names when creating new APIs. Will we need to create EPs after creating > APIs? If not I guess it's better not to allow creating APIs with > non-existing EPs, because unless we invoke the API, its bit hard to find > that the API has a broken link to an endpoint. WDYT? > > Thanks! > >> >>> WDYT? >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks and Regards, >>> >>> Isuru H. >>> +94 716 358 048 <+94%2071%20635%208048>* <http://wso2.com/>* >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Malintha Amarasinghe >> Software Engineer >> *WSO2, Inc. - lean | enterprise | middleware* >> http://wso2.com/ >> >> Mobile : +94 712383306 <+94%2071%20238%203306> >> > > > > -- > Malintha Amarasinghe > Software Engineer > *WSO2, Inc. - lean | enterprise | middleware* > http://wso2.com/ > > Mobile : +94 712383306 <+94%2071%20238%203306> > > _______________________________________________ > Architecture mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture > > -- Rukshan Chathuranga. Software Engineer. WSO2, Inc.
_______________________________________________ Architecture mailing list [email protected] https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
