Re: [Catalyst] Optional path prefix

2013-10-22 Thread Bill Moseley
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 9:08 AM, John Napiorkowski jjn1...@yahoo.comwrote:

 I'd probably myself want some plack middleware that would convert

 /api/v1/account/id/widget/id


 to


 /account/id/widget/idwith accept type application/mycompany.v1+json


I guess that would separate that out of the app.

I'm currently using this approach in an app role:

my @path_seg = split '/', $c-req-path, -1;
my $base_uri = $c-req-base;

return unless @path_seg  $path_seg[0] =~ /$path_prefix_version_regex/;

my $match = $1;

die path_prefix_version_regex ($path_prefix_version_regex) matched but
failed to capture any value
unless defined $match;

$c-stash-{path_prefix_version} = $match;
$base_uri-path( $base_uri-path . shift( @path_seg ) . '/' );

# Force $req-path to reload _path next time $req-path is called.
$c-req-_clear_path;





 But you could probably support changing the URL path pretty easily with
 either setting the controller namespace to have v1 in it, or adding a root
 tot he change that specifies the new extra path part.


But would that support it being an optional prefix?   Need both to work at
the same time.




 I understand the development word seems to prefer making version part of
 the path.  depending on your logic and the type of changes introduced it
 may or may not be easier to take one approach or the other.


It does seem like that.   Deciding to go with the flow vs. doing it the
right way is the decision to be made.   I like your suggestion to map it
to an Accept header -- best of both worlds.


-- 
Bill Moseley
mose...@hank.org
___
List: Catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk
Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


[Catalyst] Optional path prefix

2013-10-15 Thread Bill Moseley
Over in this 
threadhttp://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk/msg14226.html
was
a discussion on API versioning and implementing via Accept: headers vs.
adding a version in the URL.   Looks like using a version in the URL is
winning.

We have existing chained actions that might look like this:

/account/id/widget/id


If want to migrate to a new version scheme in the URL like this:

/api/v1/account/id/widget/id


This would be the same action chain as the first path -- and both would
work at the same time.

Is there any way to support both actions via Chained dispatching?   Or will
I need a role that looks for that pattern and strips it of the request
during prepare_action?

I've done something similar in the past where I added a language tag at the
start of every path:

/en_us/some/path/1234


I strip that off and then update $c-req-path for dispatching.



Again, I'm in the Accept: header camp for versioning, but I'm finding more
and more discussion on using URLs.There's an e-book
http://pages.apigee.com/web-api-design-ebook.htmlthat seems to be cited
often. I'd be interested in other's view on that book -- it seems written
from a practical Rails programmer point of view instead of a REST purist
view.   There's a lot in that e-book I don't really agree with (plural
nouns?), but the practical usage seems to be winning out.  Hope it's not a
mistake in the long run.


-- 
Bill Moseley
mose...@hank.org
___
List: Catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk
Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.scsys.co.uk/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/