I have completed most of the APP stuff according to the wiki and will commit the complete code soon , so that you can comment on that and I can continue the rest.
-Deepal > I went though the code and looked what actually I have done then I found > that the only problems in the resource operations like raring and > tagging. Adding , delete and accessing resources does not have any > issues, and it has follow the API in the wiki correctly [1] . Now I > started to change the implementation to cope with the API in the wiki , > but I have a number of area which I have doubt and need to clear them > before I continue. > > - How to get logs > should that be /[r1];logs > - Get versions > /[r1];versions , then the text of the feed will be the versions for > the given resource. > - /[r1];tags:[tag+username] , I can not understand the use of this > -For the rating and tagging what should be the structure of the entry . > - Did we finalized on ";" as the parameter separator. > > [1] : http://wso2.org/wiki/display/registry/Registry+Protocol > > -Thanks > Deepal > > >> It is essential that we have a *perfect* implementation of APP here >> and that it is clearly documented and /matches the documentation/! >> >> We have deliberately avoided the UDDI crowd here... so we can't afford >> to annoy the REST community by bodging APP :) >> >> Paul >> >> Glen Daniels wrote: >> >>> Hi Deepal, all: >>> >>> Deepal Jayasinghe wrote: >>> >>>>> Are we not using Abdera on the client side? >>>>> >>>> We do. >>>> >>> Yep - and upon further research into the code it looks like we >>> haven't paid much attention to the protocol design we did earlier: >>> >>> http://wso2.org/wiki/display/registry/Registry+Protocol >>> >>> Not only do we have the non-APP-ish use of POST to non-existent URLs >>> (in order to create them), but for instance to tag, we seem to do a >>> PUT of an Atom entry representing the tag to the resource URL - >>> shouldn't that be a POST to "...resource;tags"? >>> >>> >>>>> (Looks like we are given the user agent header.) So doesn't Abdera do >>>>> the right thing for this?? >>>>> >>> Abdera is apparently a little (too?) flexible about this kind of stuff. >>> >>> >>>>> Also, I noticed that in the code below we connect to the registry at >>>>> one URL but the base URL for the Atom stuff has "/atom" added to the >>>>> reg URL passed in. Is that right? Should we not say the base URL is >>>>> .../wso2registry/atom instead? >>>>> >>>> We can do that . But I intentionally implement the code to give the URL >>>> of the registry not the URL of the ATOM. Because user does not want to >>>> know whether we use APP or not , he just need a remote API to talk to a >>>> registry. So I personally do not like to provide /atom when we give >>>> the >>>> url. >>>> >>> +1 to not providing /atom when we give the URL. But -1 to tacking it >>> on in the first place. There is no need for the registry API to make >>> any assumptions about the URL except that it's rooted wherever we're >>> told. In other words - shouldn't I be able to say: >>> >>> Registry R1 = new RemoteRegistry("http://myhost/regRoot";); >>> Registry R2 = new RemoteRegistry("http://myhost/regRoot/subDir";); >>> >>> ...and have both R1 and R2 work? Isn't this how we're expecting to >>> use this for things like Synapse/Axis2 repositories? >>> >>> new RemoteRegistry("http://registrySite/registry/finance/axis2repo";); >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> --Glen >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Registry-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/registry-dev >>> >>> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Registry-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/registry-dev > > > -- Thanks, Deepal ................................................................ "The highest tower is built one brick at a time" _______________________________________________ Registry-dev mailing list [email protected] http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/registry-dev
