On 05/29/2012 06:26 PM, Geert Jansen wrote:
> 
> 
> On 05/29/2012 03:44 PM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
>> On 05/29/2012 04:14 PM, Geert Jansen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 05/29/2012 12:12 PM, Michael Pasternak wrote:
>>>
>>>> there is no point in using this resource programmatically, as it only 
>>>> contains enumerations
>>>> available in the system for given version and some other metadata,
>>>>
>>>> i.e it used by developers during the coding and it's not real system 
>>>> resource.
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced that that is true. For example, applications can use the 
>>> "power_managers" and "cpus" elements to prepopulate lists in a user 
>>> interface for example.
>>
>> this is good example indeed, then what about leaving /capabilities as is [1]
>> only adding single resource retrieval capability [2] to comply with 
>> collection/resource
>> pattern?
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> <capabilities>
>>    <version major="3" minor="1">
>>      ...
>>    </version>
>>    <version major="3" minor="1">
>>      ...
>>    </version>
>>    ...
>> </capabilities>
>>
>> [2]
>>
>>    /api/capabilities/UUID
>>
>>    <version major="3" minor="1" id=UUID>
>>      ...
>>    </version>
> 
> It would work from a compatibility point of view. However - to be honest - i 
> would leave it as it is now. You also have non-version specific capabilities 
> there, that do not
> fit any model. In my view there is no way to get to a clean design here.
> 
> The way i look at /api/capabilities is that is is a single global singleton 
> resource. It isn't a collection, and neither a resource in a collection.

it should have be collection of version_capabilities cause otherwise it not 
RESTful resource and inconsistent
with other resources in api,

as about /currently/ non-version specific capabilities: <permits> should be 
version specific as in new version
will be added new permits and same for the <scheduling_policies>, can you 
remind me what was the reasons for
making them such.

> 
> Regards,
> Geert


-- 

Michael Pasternak
RedHat, ENG-Virtualization R&D
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel

Reply via email to