On Jun 20, 2013, at 10:51 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 06/20/2013 11:20 AM, Brian Elliott wrote: >> On Jun 19, 2013, at 7:34 PM, Christopher Yeoh <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Just wondering what people thought about how necessary it is to keep XML >>> support for the Nova v3 API, given that if we want to drop it doing so >>> during the v2->v3 transition is pretty much the ideal time to do so. >>> >>> The current plan is to keep it and is what we have been doing so far when >>> porting extensions, but there are pretty obvious long term development and >>> test savings if we only have one API format to support. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Chris >>> >> >> Can we support CORBA? >> >> No really, it'd be great to drop support for it while we can. > > I agree personally ... but this has come up before, and when polling the > larger audience (and not just the dev list), there is still a large > amount of demand for XML support (or at least that was my > interpretation). So, I think it should stay. > > I'm all for anything that makes supporting both easier. It doesn't have > to be the ideal XML representation. If we wanted to adopt different > formatting to make supporting it easier (automatic conversion from json > in the code I guess), I'd be fine with that. >
I agree, we can change the XML representation to make it easy to convert between XML and JSON. If I could go back in time, that would definitely be something I would do different. 3.0 gives us an opportunity to start over in that regard. Extensions may still be "tricky" because you still want to use namespaces, but having a simpler mapping may simplify the process of supporting both. -jOrGe W. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
