On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:00:26 +0900
"Ken'ichi Ohmichi" <ken1ohmi...@gmail.com> 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
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to