Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration

[Venkata Yedugundla]

Hi all,


We need to go with api versioning at some point. However, it may not be right 
to park this till we get api versioning done.  Even if we add a global 
configuration, at some point the dependent apps need to work with uuids and its 
again some more work is needed on this. Instead let the dependent apps (if 
there are not too many) plan to work with  uuid  before 4.12 (may be they can 
continue using the id based on type of data)  and we can give the heads up 
about the same in the documentation of 4.11.


Thanks,

Subhash


From: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
Sent: 01 January 2018 16:12:28
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your 
integration

(not voting, but) +1 to the general idea of API versioning as a separate 
initiative.


- Rohit

<https://cloudstack.apache.org>
[https://cloudstack.apache.org/images/monkey-144.png]<https://cloudstack.apache.org/>

Apache CloudStack: Open Source Cloud Computing<https://cloudstack.apache.org/>
cloudstack.apache.org
CloudStack is open source cloud computing software for creating, managing, and 
deploying infrastructure cloud services







From: Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2017 9:37:18 PM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your 
integration

Hi

On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to 
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not 
> sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as 
> billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding 
> is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables 
> for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.

Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
the API to prevent breaking anything out there.

René

rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
[http://www.shapeblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/logo.png]<http://www.shapeblue.com/>

Shapeblue - The CloudStack Company<http://www.shapeblue.com/>
www.shapeblue.com
Rapid deployment framework for Apache CloudStack IaaS Clouds. CSForge is a 
framework developed by ShapeBlue to deliver the rapid deployment of a 
standardised ...



53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue



DISCLAIMER
==
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the 
property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for 
the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not 
the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, 
distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in 
error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. 
Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for 
virus infected mails.

Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration

[Rohit Yadav]

(not voting, but) +1 to the general idea of API versioning as a separate 
initiative.


- Rohit

<https://cloudstack.apache.org>




From: Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2017 9:37:18 PM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your 
integration

Hi

On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to 
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not 
> sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as 
> billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding 
> is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables 
> for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.

Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
the API to prevent breaking anything out there.

René

rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
  
 

Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration

[Rohit Yadav]

Hi Michael,


Thanks for sharing, can you confirm if Ubersmith consumes the list of events 
rather than consume from the cloud_usage.cloud_usage and related tables?


Once you and possibly other users can confirm we can keep the PR off the next 
release to work with everyone and avoid breaking billing and other 
integrations, but a refactoring of exporting UUIDs instead of IDs is inevitable 
in future releases.


As a project, we can't guarantee backward compatibilities on the event 
description/subject as we've seen minor changes to the text in the past PRs. It 
is therefore advised that external integrations and tools/vendors should 
consume from cloud_usage and related tables and not event description 
tables/lists for processing billings. Thanks.


- Rohit

<https://cloudstack.apache.org>




From: Michael J McCafferty <m...@m5hosting.com>
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2017 2:28:52 AM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your 
integration

Hi Rohit,

This will break billing for us. We use Ubersmith.

If this change is made, please make it optional (global setting for old and new 
way) or allow for different API versions either by option or path that is 
called.

Thanks!
Mike

**
Michael J. McCafferty
CEO
M5 Hosting, Inc.
http://www.m5hosting.com <http://www.m5hosting.com/>

Inc. 5000 America’s Fastest Growing Companies, 2017
**





rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
  
 

> On Dec 28, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
> All,
>
>
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to 
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not 
> sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as 
> billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding 
> is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables 
> for data than events table.
>
>
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
>
>
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
>
>
>
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com>
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration

[Nux!]

+1 for this change as far as I am concerned, seems a good one.

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

- Original Message -
> From: "Rohit Yadav" <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
> To: "dev" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>, "users" <us...@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, 28 December, 2017 09:52:37
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your 
> integration

> All,
> 
> 
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not 
> sure
> if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms
> etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external
> billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data 
> than
> events table.
> 
> 
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
> 
> 
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
> 
> 
> - Rohit
> 
> <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
> 
> 
> 
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue

Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration

[Khosrow Moossavi]

+1 on API versioning and make it really RESTful (cherry on top).
I'm willing to participate on this change if voted for.

Khosrow Moossavi
CloudOps



On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Rene Moser  wrote:

> Hi
>
> On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > All,
> >
> >
> > We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not
> sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as
> billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding
> is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related
> tables for data than events table.
> >
> >
> > The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
> >
> >
> > Comments, thoughts? Thanks.
>
> Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
> the API to prevent breaking anything out there.
>
> René
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration

[Rene Moser]

Hi

On 12/28/2017 10:52 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> All,
> 
> 
> We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to 
> use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not 
> sure if this could potentially break any external integration such as 
> billing, crms etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding 
> is external billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables 
> for data than events table.
> 
> 
> The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940
> 
> 
> Comments, thoughts? Thanks.

Even though I am +1 with this change, we should work towards versioning
the API to prevent breaking anything out there.

René

[DISCUSS] Changing events to include UUIDs, could it break your integration

[Rohit Yadav]

All,


We've come across a pull request which changes the event description to 
use/export UUIDs instead of the numeric internal ID of a resource. I'm not sure 
if this could potentially break any external integration such as billing, crms 
etc. so wanted to get your feedback on this. My understanding is external 
billing/intergrations would consume from the usage related tables for data than 
events table.


The PR is https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1940


Comments, thoughts? Thanks.


- Rohit





rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue