On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> wrote: On 01/14/2014 05:17 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net > > This skirts the run time issue, but using twice as many resources. It > doesn't however address the fact that real effort goes into maintaining > and reviewing those clients. Or the review on the Nova side to get these > things in. Or the double documentation duties. Or the fact that it > inhibits certain things in JSON because they wouldn't be XML friendly. > Or the extra code that we need to carry around to handle bad XML insertion. > > There is a real cost of our dual data payload strategy. A cost in real > people that means we aren't doing other things, or doing other things > better. > > The folks working on keeping XML alive aren't doing it because they have > a dramatic passion for XML and wouldn't be contributing to the project > otherwise, so I think we'd be able to cover far more important parts of > the project if we dropped this load. > > Oh I totally agree with this, was just thinking of alternatives if we can't get consensus as I know this has been suggested before that we should remove the XML support.
> > I think it would be a much better situation if the Nova API is a > > single payload type. The work on the jsonschema validation is also > > something where I think we could get to a fully discoverable API, > > which would be huge. > > > > > > Discoverable is nice to a point but I think we need to be cautious how > > far we take it as I think at least the positive tests should be written > > based on the specification and not autogenerated because that will help > > pick up inconsistencies we have between what we claim our API is versus > > what it actually is (more automation of documentation will help reduce > > but I don't think it will eliminate that problem). > > I don't want discoverability for Tempest (not on the positive side), I > 100% believe that we should remain explicit on function testing. > > I want discoverability for Users and SDKs. I want user toolkits that > work with Nova to have a fully discoverable way to work with our API. As > I think that would be a *great* API for our users, and would make life > dramatically simpler for our SDK ecosystem. > > +1 And as I mentioned in another thread having a summit cross project session on APIs I think would be very valuable and should cover these sorts of issues. Chris
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
