Yes, seems ok to change the return type of *all *the RPC handlers to http::Response to make it more flexible.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Zhou Z Xing <[email protected]> wrote: > yes, the same question > > For some of the APIs, in addition to 'BadRequest', 'Forbidden' is also > required. > > Thanks & Best Wishes, > > Tom Xing(邢舟) > Emerging Technology Institute, IBM China Software Development Lab > ---------------------- > IBM China Software Development Laboratory (CSDL) > Notes ID:Zhou Z Xing/China/IBM > Phone :86-10-82450442 > e-Mail :[email protected] > Address :Building No.28, ZhongGuanCun Software Park, No.8 Dong Bei Wang > West Road, Haidian District, Beijing, P.R.China 100193 > 地址 :中国北京市海淀区东北旺西路8号 中关村软件园28号楼 100193 > > > [image: Inactive hide details for haosdent ---2016-06-07 上午 > 08:43:46---Currently, almost our v1 Operator API return value type is > v]haosdent > ---2016-06-07 上午 08:43:46---Currently, almost our v1 Operator API return > value type is v1::master::Response. > > From: haosdent <[email protected]> > To: dev <[email protected]> > Cc: Vinod Kone <[email protected]>, Abhishek Dasgupta < > [email protected]>, Jay JN Guo/China/IBM@IBMCN, Zhou Z > Xing/China/IBM@IBMCN, Qian AZ Zhang/China/IBM@IBMCN, Yong Feng < > [email protected]>, Anand Mazumdar <[email protected]>, Shuai Lin < > [email protected]> > Date: 2016-06-07 上午 08:43 > Subject: [HTTP API] Questions about v1 Operator API return value type > ------------------------------ > > > > Currently, almost our v1 Operator API return value type > is v1::master::Response. > Now we validation `Call` by `validation::master::call::validate(call, > principal)` and return `BadRequest` if it could not pass. > In some cases, we need to validate the `Call` with other parameters. For > example, > > ``` > Option<Error> validate = validation::operation::validate( > operation.create(), slave->checkpointedResources, principal); > ``` > > 1. Could we delegate this validation into the implementation of API? If > delegate the validation to API, the return type would be > `process::http::Response` because of `BadRequest` could not convert to > `v1::master::Response`. > > 2. And for keep consistent, should we change existing RPC handlers' return > type to `v1::master::Response` as well? > > -- > Best Regards, > Haosdent Huang > > >
