> Here is my proposal: We keep the original API but we don't do work on > it aside from security fixes. We add additional functionality to the > API2 and the Twitter API going forward. We indicate that new clients > should be developed using the API2. I should be able to support > requests for new functionality in the API2 from client developers who > are making use of it. I suggest we call them something like "API > (deprecated)", "API2 (current)", and "Twitter-compatible API".
Sounds good to me! Thanks for clarifying :-) Just to make sure I get this right... https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ESME/API+2.0+-+Design https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ESME/RESTAPI These two wiki pages are talking about the same API right? Can I remove the column "Current (RPC)" on this page? https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ESME/RESTAPI I think it is better if we use the page to document the API instead of comparing the two. /Anne On 16. jan. 2011, at 13.18, Ethan Jewett wrote: > I think that "api" and "restapi" are the same thing, aren't they? API2 > is both more RESTful than the original (for whatever that is worth) > and includes streaming functionality for a few endpoints with a Jira > ticket in the backlog to implement streaming for more endpoints. It is > not really accurate to call it a "streaming" API because it is a full > API for the application that includes streaming functionality where > appropriate. > > The https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ESME/RESTAPI page is > actually a copy of the original API page > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ESME/Google+Code+API with > further discussion of how to convert it to a more RESTful format. This > eventually became the "API2" > > Confusing enough? ;-) > > Here is my proposal: We keep the original API but we don't do work on > it aside from security fixes. We add additional functionality to the > API2 and the Twitter API going forward. We indicate that new clients > should be developed using the API2. I should be able to support > requests for new functionality in the API2 from client developers who > are making use of it. I suggest we call them something like "API > (deprecated)", "API2 (current)", and "Twitter-compatible API". > > I think this actually tracks quite well with what we are already > doing. How does that sound? > > Ethan > > On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Anne Kathrine Petterøe > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Moved on to the API page: http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ESME/API >> >> We now have four APIs: >> api - original REST-like API >> api2 - streaming API >> restapi - rest API >> twitterapi - twitter API >> >> or actually 5, we also have the jmx, but that's for a very specific use >> case.. >> >> I think we should simplify our APIs or at least it would be great if we >> could, because this scenario is very confusing for new users to Apache ESME. >> It is confusing even to me actually... >> >> What are the current status on the different APIs? >> Do we have any current clients which uses the original API? >> >> /Anne >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
