> On June 22, 2015, 8:04 p.m., Ben Mahler wrote:
> > Adding this seems good since it's agnostic to how it is used. But for 
> > reservations specifically, any reason not to use just BadRequest?
> > 
> > From what I can tell, this is generally used for conditional requests 
> > (based on headers or some other conditionals): 
> > http://stackoverflow.com/a/5369582
> > What will the pre-conditions be for /reserve? If the request does not 
> > contain explicit pre-conditions, it seems a little non-idiomatic to return 
> > 412..?

I was hoping to keep `BadRequest` to situations where the user has provided 
bad/invalid arguments. e.g. invalid JSON format, missing parameters, invalid 
resources, etc.

I was aiming to use `PreconditionFailed` to represent the case where the user 
have provided perfectly valid arguments, but we don't currently have sufficient 
resources to satisfy the request. The precondition here is whether we have 
sufficient resources or not. I'm of course open to using `BadRequest` with an 
explanation or what went wrong, or perhaps using a different status. (e.g. 
`Conflict` was suggested)

I'm not an expert on HTTP statuses and so I don't have a strong stance here, do 
you have a strong opinion or stance on this? I'm really open to anything.


- Michael


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/35714/#review88839
-----------------------------------------------------------


On June 22, 2015, 5:08 a.m., Michael Park wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/35714/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 22, 2015, 5:08 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B and Jie Yu.
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Needed in subsequent patch for /reserve master endpoint.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/http.hpp 
> e47cc7afbc8110759edf25a2dc05d09eda25c417 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/35714/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> `make check`
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Michael Park
> 
>

Reply via email to