Concrete example of an api-ref difference between Mitaka and Newton: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/356693/1/api-ref/source/v2/images-parameters.yaml
-----Original Message----- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 10:20 AM To: Nikhil Komawar <nik.koma...@gmail.com>; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] versioning the api-ref? On 08/18/2016 11:57 AM, Nikhil Komawar wrote: > I guess the intent was to indicate the need for indicating the micro > or in case of Glance minor version bump when required. > > The API isn't drastically different, there are new and old elements as > shown in the Nova api ref linked. Right, so the point is that it should all be describable in a single document. It's like the fact that when you go to python API docs you get things like - https://docs.python.org/2/library/wsgiref.html "New in version 2.5." Perhaps if there is a concrete example of the expected differences between what would be in the mitaka tree vs. newton tree was can figure out an appropriate way to express that in api-ref. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
