Hey Thierry,
Here is a list the team compiled on the known gaps in the 1.1
implementation. I haven't had a chance to file any bugs on these yet, but
wanted to at least answer this email with the list. I split them roughly
based on complexity.
Most complex:
resource uuids - there is a mixture of integer IDs and UUIDs in responses
from the API right now
versioned content types (Accept: application/xml; version=1.1) as a method
for selecting the version
Asynchronous faults (defined in 3.9.2)
Pagination Links ("next" links, defined in 3.4 - this may not be that
complex)
Relatively simple:
alternate links for images (links directly to glance, discussed in 3.3 and
shown in examples 3.10 and 3.11)
Collections sorted by create time (defined in 3.4)
minDisk and minRam filtering of flavors output (defined in 4.4.1)
minDisk and minRam exposed as attributes of images (defined in 4.5.1,
requires work in glance)
image statuses should match spec (defined in 4.5.1, requires work in
glance)
complex content types (e.g. Accept: application/vnd.openstack.compute+xml)
This seems do-able, but of course help is appreciated. If you are going
to start on one, I think it makes sense to file a bug and claim it before
starting to work on them. The minDisk and minRam gaps, asynchronous
faults and resource UUID gaps seem the most critical to me.
Of course there may be other gaps as well - help identifying those is also
very much appreciated.
Gabe
On 9/8/11 3:09 AM, "Thierry Carrez" <thie...@openstack.org> wrote:
>Ewan Mellor wrote:
>> I would also add that if we claim that Diablo implements OpenStack API
>>1.1, and there's a doc that calls itself OpenStack API 1.1, then if
>>those two things don't match by the time we ship we don't deserve to
>>call ourselves professionals and we should all go home.
>>
>> I'm not going to get into arguments about designing the API up front vs
>>driving the API from the capabilities of the platform. I don't care why
>>the two things are skewed at the moment. However, they absolutely 100%
>>have to be lined up by the time Diablo is released.
>
>A lot of people have been working on closing the gap this cycle, but
>from where I stand, there still seems to be bugs regularly opened about
>difference between API and code.
>
>Could someone that has been involved in keeping the gap under control
>elaborate on the current status ? Are we looking good, bad ? Should we
>tag all API gap bugs and try to focus our efforts on that ? Are the
>remaining bugs considered "small enough" ?
>
>Regards,
>
>--
>Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>Release Manager, OpenStack
>
>_______________________________________________
>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error,
please delete it.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
