I guess it should be fine. Adding a parameter shouldn't break the compatibility and if it does then it should be corrected from the client side.
On 29/10/13 7:21 AM, "Marcus Sorensen" <shadow...@gmail.com> wrote: >I almost can't believe this doesn't already exist, but I noticed that >listing a volume doesn't show you the id of the storage pool the >volume belongs to. It shows the pool name, but it seems that doesn't >have to be unique. Does anyone have a problem with me adding that to >the listVolumes response? Are there any tests that might fail due to >hardcoded response expectations?
