On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:00:26 +0900 "Ken'ichi Ohmichi" <[email protected]> wrote: \> > So how about just using HTTP 200(OK) only for status codes? > That would give up providing accurate internal status to clients but > backwards backwards incompatibilities never happen. >
No I think that we should where possible return the most accurate status code. A 202 versus 200 is an important distinction for a user of the API (eg do they need to poll for request completion?). How fast we can get to accurate status codes through the API is a different matter though. > and I have one more idea for making API consistency of whole > OpenStack projects. That is each rule of the style guide is > implemented in Tempest. Tempest has its own REST clients for many > projects and we can customize them for improving qualities. After > defining the REST API style guide, we can add each > rule to Tempest's base client class and apply it for all REST APIs > which are tested > by Tempest. We can keep consistent API for the existing projects and > apply the style guide to new projects also by this framework. That's an interesting idea! However we would have a long exception list for a quite a while I think as it was made pretty clear to use we can't make a large number of backwards compatible API changes over a short period of time. (Like a v2->v3 transition was). Regards, Chris _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
