Re: [openstack-dev] [all][api] POST /api-wg/news

> On Mar 9, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Ed Leafe <e...@leafe.com> wrote: > > Greetings OpenStack community, > > Today's meeting started on a heavyhearted note, as we hoisted our virtual > beers and gave a toast to Everett Toews, who recently had to step down from > his AP

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][api] POST /api-wg/news

On Feb 6, 2017, at 3:28 PM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi > wrote: 2017-02-06 6:45 GMT-08:00 Brian Rosmaita >: On 2/6/17 5:51 AM, Jordan Pittier wrote: [super-enormous snip -- Chris, Ken, and

Re: [openstack-dev] [ironic] [API] Evolving our REST API

On Oct 13, 2016, at 10:00 AM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: > > So I have finalized five proposals of substantial changes we can make, that > folks agreed were important to work on, and which I believe we can do within > the > microversion framework starting

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][API WG] How does one best express a time interval as an API filtering query?

> On Oct 6, 2016, at 10:43 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > > On 2016-10-06 10:30:30 -0500 (-0500), Kevin L. Mitchell wrote: > [...] >> Problem with that is that ':' is a valid character within an ISO date, >> though I do like the 'between' prefix. Now, '/' can be used if it's

[openstack-dev] [all][api] POST /api-wg/news

Subject: [all][api] POST /api-wg/news Greetings OpenStack community, Today we were joined by Scott DAngelo (scottda) who has graciously taken over the liaison role for Cinder as Alex Meade steps down. Thanks for stepping up Scott and welcome to the API WG! We also cleaned house today and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][API] Need naming suggestions for "capabilities"

Top posting with general comment... It sounds like there's some consensus in Nova-land around these traits (née "capabilities"). The API Working Group [4] is also aware of similar efforts in Cinder [1][2] and Glance [3]. If these are truly the same concepts being discussed across projects, it

[openstack-dev] [all][api] POST /api-wg/news

Greetings OpenStack community, Our main new topic for today was making sure that we take a more active role in curating the bugs that are now being kept in launchpad [4] by including review of those bugs in the workshopping that we do in each meeting. If you find issues in the existing

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] APIs for exposing resource capabilities

On Aug 3, 2016, at 12:59 AM, Ramakrishna, Deepti > wrote: Hi, I would like to bring your attention to my spec [1] (already approved) on capability APIs and would like to get feedback from API WG. To summarize, I propose

[openstack-dev] [all][api] POST /api-wg/news

Greetings OpenStack community, A few interesting developments in the API WG this week. The API WG reviewed the new Glance Artifact Repository (aka Glare) API [4]. The team was already adhering to most of the API WG guidelines [3] and after some reviews they were able to get excellent coverage

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] API changes on limit / marker / sort in Newton

> On Jun 1, 2016, at 2:01 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > Agree with Sean, I'd prefer separate microversions since it makes getting > these in easier since they are easier to review (and remember we make changes > to python-novaclient for each of these also). > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] API-WG summit session recap

> On May 9, 2016, at 10:12 AM, michael mccune wrote: > > Promoting the guidelines > > > The heart of the API-WG has always been the guidelines that are produced, we > had a nice discussion about how we can increase the awareness and usage of > the

[openstack-dev] [all][api] New API Guidelines Ready for Cross Project Review

Hi All, The following API guideline is ready for final review. It will be merged on March 18, if there's no further feedback. 1. Header non-proliferation guideline https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280381/ Cheers, Everett

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [api] API Working Group Refresher

On Jan 17, 2016, at 8:56 PM, Qiming Teng > wrote: On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 12:48:51PM +, Chris Dent wrote: At yesterday's API Working Group meeting we decided it would be a good idea to send out a refresher on the existence of

Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][api] Looking for a Cross-Project Liaison for the API Working Group

On Dec 2, 2015, at 12:32 AM, 王华 > wrote: Adrian, I would like to be an alternate. Regards Wanghua On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Adrian Otto > wrote: Everett, Thanks for

[openstack-dev] [magnum][api] Looking for a Cross-Project Liaison for the API Working Group

Hello Magnumites, The API Working Group [1] is looking for a Cross-Project Liaison [2] from the Magnum project. What does such a role entail? The API Working Group seeks API subject matter experts for each project to communicate plans for API updates, review API guidelines with their

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] consolidate IRC change with #openstack-sdk?

On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:58 AM, michael mccune wrote: > > On 11/30/2015 08:45 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> Ok, I'm going to assume with no real disagreement we're agreed here. I'm >> moving the api-wg notifications to #openstack-sdks now - >>

[openstack-dev] [all][api] New API Guidelines Ready for Cross Project Review

Hi All, The following API guidelines are ready for cross project review. They will be merged on Nov. 20 if there's no further feedback. 1. Add introduction for API micro version guideline https://review.openstack.org/#/c/187112/ 2. Add description of pagination parameters

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][api] New API Guidelines Ready for Cross Project Review

> On Nov 13, 2015, at 12:01 PM, John Dickinson <m...@not.mn> wrote: > > > > On 13 Nov 2015, at 9:42, Everett Toews wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> The following API guidelines are ready for cross project review. They will >> be merged on Nov.

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] consolidate IRC change with #openstack-sdk?

Please note that should be #openstack-sdks (plural) ! > On Nov 13, 2015, at 6:58 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > > The #openstack-api IRC channel is quite quiet most days. As such it's > not something that people are regularly checking in on, or often forget > about (I know I've been

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][api]

On Nov 9, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Tony Breeds wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 12:30:19PM +, John Garbutt wrote: > >> Ideally, I would like us to fill out that pagination part first. > > It seems the person leading this within the API-WG is AWOL so ... A couple of

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][api]

On Nov 6, 2015, at 6:30 AM, John Garbutt > wrote: On 6 November 2015 at 12:11, Sean Dague > wrote: On 11/06/2015 04:13 AM, Salvatore Orlando wrote: It makes sense to have a single point were response

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][api][tc][perfromance] API for getting only status of resources

On Nov 3, 2015, at 11:46 PM, John Griffith > wrote: On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 4:57 PM, michael mccune > wrote: On 11/03/2015 05:20 PM, Boris Pavlovic wrote: What if we add new API method that will

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][api] Pagination in thre API

On Nov 5, 2015, at 5:44 AM, John Garbutt > wrote: On 5 November 2015 at 09:46, Richard Jones > wrote: As a consumer of such APIs on the Horizon side, I'm all for consistency in pagination,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] service catalog: TNG

On Oct 9, 2015, at 9:39 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > > It looks like some great conversation got going on the service catalog > standardization spec / discussion at the last cross project meeting. > Sorry I wasn't there to participate. > > A lot of that ended up in here (which was an

[openstack-dev] [all][api] New API Guidelines Ready for Cross Project Review

Hi All, The following API guidelines are ready for cross project review. They will be merged on Oct. 16 if there's no further feedback. 1. Adds an API documentation guideline document https://review.openstack.org/#/c/214817/ 2. Add http400 for nonexistent resource

Re: [openstack-dev] [api][keystone][openstackclient] Standards for object name attributes and filtering

On Sep 1, 2015, at 8:36 PM, Dolph Mathews wrote: > Does anyone have an example of an API outside of OpenStack that would return > 400 in this situation (arbitrary query string parameters)? Based on my past > experience, I'd expect them to be ignored, but I can't think

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][api] New API Guidelines Ready for Cross Project Review

On Aug 27, 2015, at 10:48 AM, Everett Toews <everett.to...@rackspace.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > The following API guidelines are ready for cross project review. They will be > merged on Sept. 4 if there's no further feedback. > > 1. Add description of pagin

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] [wsme] [ceilometer] Replacing WSME with _____ ?

On Aug 28, 2015, at 6:10 PM, Morgan Fainberg morgan.fainb...@gmail.com wrote: It seems like Flask has a reasonable amount of support and there is a good ecosystem around it but that aside (as Jay said)... I definitely support exposing the schema to the end user; making it easier for the end

[openstack-dev] [all][api] New API Guidelines Ready for Cross Project Review

Hi All, The following API guidelines are ready for cross project review. They will be merged on Sept. 4 if there's no further feedback. 1. Add description of pagination parameters https://review.openstack.org/#/c/190743/ 2. Require OpenStack- in headers https://review.openstack.org/#/c/215683/

Re: [openstack-dev] [api][keystone][openstackclient] Standards for object name attributes and filtering

On Aug 26, 2015, at 4:45 AM, Henry Nash hen...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: Hi With keystone, we recently came across an issue in terms of the assumptions that the openstack client is making about the entities it can show - namely that is assumes all entries have a ‘name’ attribute (which is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Resend] [api] Who owns API versioning and deprecation policy?

On Aug 21, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Geoff Arnold ge...@geoffarnold.com wrote: After reading the following pages, it’s unclear what the current API deprecation policy is and who owns it. (The first spec implies that a change took place in May 2015, but is silent on what and why.) Any hints? An

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] [all] To changes-since or not to changes-since

On Aug 9, 2015, at 11:03 PM, hao wang sxmatch1...@gmail.commailto:sxmatch1...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, stackers Since now we have merged filtering guideline[1], is that said we should implement this feature according this guideline? like this: GET /app/items?f_updated_at=gte:some_timestamp Do

[openstack-dev] [all][api] New API Guidelines ready for cross project review

Hi All, We have 7 API Guidelines that are ready for a final review. 1. Add section clarifying PUT vs PATCH semantics https://review.openstack.org/#/c/183945/ 2. Adding 5xx guidance https://review.openstack.org/#/c/183698/ 3. Adds a small update to tagging guidance

Re: [openstack-dev] [api][Solum] Request for feedback on new API resource

On Jun 18, 2015, at 3:07 PM, Devdatta Kulkarni devdatta.kulka...@rackspace.commailto:devdatta.kulka...@rackspace.com wrote: Hi, API WG team, In Solum, recently we have been working on some changes to our REST API. Basically, we have introduced a new resource ('app'). The spec for this has

[openstack-dev] [all][api] New API Guidelines ready for cross project review

Hi All, We have 3 API Guidelines that are ready for a final review. 1. Add section on filtering https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177468/ 2. http guideline expansion: background https://review.openstack.org/#/c/181931/ 3. Should not return server-side tracebacks

Re: [openstack-dev] [monasca] [java]

On May 15, 2015, at 3:49 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote: Dieterly, Deklan wrote: We’ve seen that Swift has introduced components in Go. So, this looks like a precedent for allowing other languages where deemed appropriate. Before we spend many man-hours hacking on the Python

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][cinder] can we deprecate the volume CLIs in novaclient?

On May 15, 2015, at 10:28 AM, John Griffith john.griffi...@gmail.commailto:john.griffi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.commailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote: This came up while talking about bug 1454369 [1]. This also came up at

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Proposing Michael McCune as an API Working Group core

Top posting to make it official...Michael McCune (elmiko) is an API Working Group core! Cheers, Everett On May 11, 2015, at 8:57 PM, Ryan Brown rybr...@redhat.com wrote: On 05/11/2015 04:18 PM, Everett Toews wrote: I would like to propose Michael McCune (elmiko) as an API Working Group core

[openstack-dev] [all][api] State of the OpenStack API Working Group: Liberty Edition

This blog post is basically a preview of our cross-project session. http://blog.phymata.com/2015/05/14/state-of-the-api-wg-liberty-edition/ The API WG will also be busy bunch at the Summit. 1 cross-project session API Working Group: State of the Group [1] 2 working group sessions API

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][api] Allow passing body for more API methods

On May 11, 2015, at 1:05 PM, Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.commailto:dtro...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Rosa, Andrea (HP Cloud Services) andrea.r...@hp.commailto:andrea.r...@hp.com wrote: Agreed. Violating the HTTP spec is something that should be avoided. Actually it is

[openstack-dev] [api] Proposing Michael McCune as an API Working Group core

I would like to propose Michael McCune (elmiko) as an API Working Group core. Among Michael’s many fine qualities: * Active from the start * Highly available * Very knowledgable about APIs * Committed the guideline template * Working on moving the API Guidelines wiki page * Lots of

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Changing 403 Forbidden to 400 Bad Request for OverQuota was: [nova] Which error code should we return when OverQuota

On May 6, 2015, at 1:58 PM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.commailto:dkr...@redhat.com wrote: +1 The basic problem is we are trying to fit a square (generic api) peg in a round (HTTP request/response) hole. But if we do say we are recognizing sub-error-codes, it might be good to actually give them

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][api] API working group liaisons and responsibilities

On Apr 30, 2015, at 9:54 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Stackers, OK, so Matthew Gilliard and Alex Xu have volunteered to be the Nova team's liaisons to the API working group. Big thank you to Matthew and Alex for volunteering for this important role. I've created a wiki

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][api] 3 API Guidelines up for final review

All 3 API guidelines have merged. Thanks everyone! Everett On Apr 22, 2015, at 2:08 PM, Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote: Hi All, We have 3 API Guidelines that are ready for a final review. 1. Metadata guidelines document https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141229/ 2

[openstack-dev] [api] Missing meetings this week

Hi All, I’ll be out the next few days and will be missing our meetings. Specifically the cross-project meeting [1] and our API WG meeting [2]. On the plus side I got to my action items from the last meeting and “froze” the 3 guidelines up for review and proposed a cross-project session [3]

[openstack-dev] [all][api] 3 API Guidelines up for final review

Hi All, We have 3 API Guidelines that are ready for a final review. 1. Metadata guidelines document https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141229/ 2. Tagging guidelines https://review.openstack.org/#/c/155620/ 3. Guidelines on using date and time format https://review.openstack.org/#/c/159892/ If

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Minor changes to API

On Apr 20, 2015, at 7:07 PM, Ian Wells ijw.ubu...@cack.org.ukmailto:ijw.ubu...@cack.org.uk wrote: On 20 April 2015 at 15:23, Matthew Treinish mtrein...@kortar.orgmailto:mtrein...@kortar.org wrote: On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 03:10:40PM -0700, Ian Wells wrote: It would be nice to have a consistent

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [api] gabbi: A tool for declarative testing of APIs

On Apr 20, 2015, at 2:45 PM, Chris Dent chd...@redhat.com wrote: I wanted to make a quick update on the latest happenings with gabbi[0], the tool I've created to do declarative testing of OpenStack APIs (starting with Ceilometer and Gnocchi). * Jay Pipes and I are doing a presentation API

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Minor changes to API

On Apr 20, 2015, at 2:19 PM, Douglas Mendizabal douglas.mendiza...@rackspace.commailto:douglas.mendiza...@rackspace.com wrote: Hi openstack-dev@ I was wondering if the API Working Group had an opinion on how to deal with minor changes to the api? For example, what if you wanted to add a new

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] API WG Meeting Time

On Apr 1, 2015, at 10:12 AM, Ian Cordasco ian.corda...@rackspace.com wrote: On 4/1/15, 08:24, michael mccune m...@redhat.com wrote: On 04/01/2015 08:35 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 03/31/2015 10:13 PM, Everett Toews wrote: Ever since daylight savings time it has been increasing difficult

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [all][log] Openstack HTTP error codes

On Jan 29, 2015, at 8:34 PM, Rochelle Grober rochelle.gro...@huawei.commailto:rochelle.gro...@huawei.com wrote: Hi folks! Changed the tags a bit because this is a discussion for all projects and dovetails with logging rationalization/standards/ At the Paris summit, we had a number of session

[openstack-dev] [api] API WG Meeting Time

Ever since daylight savings time it has been increasing difficult for many API WG members to make it to the Thursday 00:00 UTC meeting time. Do we change it so there’s only the Thursday 16:00 UTC meeting time? On a related note, I can’t make it to tomorrow’s meeting. Can someone else please

[openstack-dev] [all] [api] Erring is Caring

Hi All, An API Working Group Guideline for Errors https://review.openstack.org/#/c/167793/ Errors are a crucial part of the developer experience when using an API. As developers learn the API they inevitably run into errors. The quality and consistency of the error messages returned to them

Re: [openstack-dev] [api][nova] Openstack HTTP error codes

Top posting to continue the discussion in another thread. [openstack-dev] [all] [api] Erring is Caring http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/060314.html Everett On Feb 4, 2015, at 10:29 AM, Duncan Thomas duncan.tho...@gmail.commailto:duncan.tho...@gmail.com wrote:

Re: [openstack-dev] [API] Do we need to specify follow the HTTP RFCs?

Top posting the relevant review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/161946/ Everett On Feb 13, 2015, at 8:44 AM, michael mccune m...@redhat.commailto:m...@redhat.com wrote: On 02/12/2015 02:20 PM, Ryan Brown wrote: +1 I think the way to go would be: We suggest (pretty please) that you comply

Re: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Experimental API

On Mar 12, 2015, at 1:42 PM, Brian Rosmaita brian.rosma...@rackspace.com wrote: I don't know how elaborate we want to get here, but Everett Toews had an interesting suggestion in the openstack-api channel. It would go something like this: (1) User gets /x1/search endpoint from service

Re: [openstack-dev] [api][all] - Openstack.error common library

On Feb 25, 2015, at 10:47 AM, Doug Hellmann d...@doughellmann.commailto:d...@doughellmann.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 25, 2015, at 09:33 AM, Eugeniya Kudryashova wrote: Hi, stackers! As was suggested in topic [1], using an HTTP header was a good solution for communicating common/standardized

Re: [openstack-dev] The API WG mission statement

On Feb 12, 2015, at 9:29 AM, Ryan Brown rybr...@redhat.commailto:rybr...@redhat.com wrote: On 02/10/2015 08:01 AM, Everett Toews wrote: On Feb 9, 2015, at 9:28 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.commailto:jaypi...@gmail.com mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 02/02/2015 02:51 PM, Stefano Maffulli

[openstack-dev] [api] Missing the next API WG meeting

I’ll be missing the next API WG meeting [1] as I’m in some all day training. Someone else will have to #startmeeting api wg Cheers, Everett [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/API-WG __ OpenStack Development

Re: [openstack-dev] The API WG mission statement

On Feb 9, 2015, at 9:28 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.commailto:jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 02/02/2015 02:51 PM, Stefano Maffulli wrote: On Fri, 2015-01-30 at 23:05 +, Everett Toews wrote: To converge the OpenStack APIs to a consistent and pragmatic RESTful design by creating guidelines

Re: [openstack-dev] Which repo should the API WG use?

, Everett Toews wrote: It was suggested that the API WG use the openstack-specs [1] and/or the api-wg [2] repo to publish its guidelines. We’ve already arrived at the consensus that we should only use 1 repo [3]. So the purpose of this thread is to decide... Should the API WG use the openstack-specs repo

Re: [openstack-dev] The API WG mission statement

On Feb 3, 2015, at 10:07 AM, michael mccune m...@redhat.com wrote: On 02/02/2015 08:58 AM, Chris Dent wrote: This is pretty good but I think it leaves unresolved the biggest question I've had about this process: What's so great about converging the APIs? If we can narrow or clarify that

Re: [openstack-dev] [api][nova] Openstack HTTP error codes

On Feb 2, 2015, at 7:24 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.netmailto:s...@dague.net wrote: On 02/02/2015 05:35 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 01/29/2015 12:41 PM, Sean Dague wrote: Correct. This actually came up at the Nova mid cycle in a side conversation with Ironic and Neutron folks. HTTP error codes are

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [all][log] Openstack HTTP error codes

On Jan 29, 2015, at 7:34 PM, Rochelle Grober rochelle.gro...@huawei.commailto:rochelle.gro...@huawei.com wrote: Hi folks! Changed the tags a bit because this is a discussion for all projects and dovetails with logging rationalization/standards/ At the Paris summit, we had a number of session

[openstack-dev] The API WG mission statement

Hi All, Something we in the API WG keep bumping into are misconceptions around what our mission really is. There’s general agreement in the WG about our mission but we haven’t formalized it. It’s really highlighted the need for a mission statement/elevator pitch/mantra that we can repeat to

Re: [openstack-dev] The API WG mission statement

On Jan 30, 2015, at 4:57 PM, Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote: Hi All, Something we in the API WG keep bumping into are misconceptions around what our mission really is. There’s general agreement in the WG about our mission but we haven’t formalized it. It’s really

Re: [openstack-dev] [api][nova] Openstack HTTP error codes

On Jan 29, 2015, at 11:41 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote: Correct. This actually came up at the Nova mid cycle in a side conversation with Ironic and Neutron folks. HTTP error codes are not sufficiently granular to describe what happens when a REST service goes wrong, especially if it

[openstack-dev] 1 or 2 repos for the API WG

The suggestion of whether to use 1 or 2 repos for the API WG surfaced on the ML here [1]. That thread then morphed into a discussion on whether to use 1 or 2 repos. I believe it’s correct to say that the consensus on that thread was for 1 repo. We also discussed the question of 1 or 2 repos

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-operators] [all][log] Openstack HTTP error codes

On Jan 30, 2015, at 3:17 PM, Jesse Keating j...@bluebox.net wrote: On 1/30/15 1:08 PM, Everett Toews wrote: Project: A client dealing with the API already knows what project (service) they’re dealing with. Including this in an API error message would be redundant. That’s not necessarily so

[openstack-dev] Which repo should the API WG use?

It was suggested that the API WG use the openstack-specs [1] and/or the api-wg [2] repo to publish its guidelines. We’ve already arrived at the consensus that we should only use 1 repo [3]. So the purpose of this thread is to decide... Should the API WG use the openstack-specs repo or the

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] API Definition Formats

On Jan 18, 2015, at 9:25 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 01/13/2015 07:41 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 01/09/2015 04:17 PM, Everett Toews wrote: One thing that has come up in the past couple of API WG meetings [1] is just how useful a proper API definition would be for the OpenStack

[openstack-dev] [api] Next meeting agenda

A couple of important topics came up as a result of attending the Cross Project Meeting. I’ve added both to the agenda for the next meeting on Thursday 2015/01/29 at 16:00 UTC. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/API-WG#Agenda The first is the suggestion from ttx to consider using

[openstack-dev] New API guideline accepted for Collection Resources

I’d like to announce that a new API guideline has been accepted for Collection Resources. http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/guidelines/representation_structure.html#collection-resources JSON request and response representations for collection resources should be an object that

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Re: [Neutron][L3] Stop agent scheduling without topping sevices

On Jan 9, 2015, at 8:15 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: Adding [api] topic. On 01/08/2015 07:47 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: Is there another openstack service that allows this so we can make the API consistent between the two when this change is made? Kevin, thank you VERY much for

[openstack-dev] [api] API Definition Formats

One thing that has come up in the past couple of API WG meetings [1] is just how useful a proper API definition would be for the OpenStack projects. By API definition I mean a format like Swagger, RAML, API Blueprint, etc. These formats are a machine/human readable way of describing your API.

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] [sdk] Proposal to achieve consistency in client side sorting

On Jan 6, 2015, at 12:46 PM, Kevin L. Mitchell kevin.mitch...@rackspace.com wrote: On Tue, 2015-01-06 at 12:19 -0600, Anne Gentle wrote: I'm all for consistency. Sounds like a great case for the API Working Group to document. You can propose a patch describing the way we want sorting to

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Analysis of current API design

I thought the analysis on service catalogs might attract some attention. ;) More inline On Dec 19, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Amit Gandhi amit.gan...@rackspace.com wrote: How do the allocation of the service types in the service catalog get created. AFAICT it’s arbitrary. Provider picks the string

[openstack-dev] [api] Analysis of current API design

Hi All, At the recent API WG meeting [1] we discussed the need for more analysis of current API design. We need to get better at doing analysis of current API design as part of our guideline proposals. We are not creating these guidelines in a vacuum. The current design should be analyzed and

[openstack-dev] [MagnetoDB][api] Hello from the API WG

Hello MagnetoDB! During the latest meeting [1] of the API Working Group (WG) we noticed that MagnetoDB made use of the APIImpact flag [2]. That’s excellent and exactly how we were hoping the use of flag as a discovery mechanism would work! We were wondering if the MagentoDB team would like to

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Counting resources

On Nov 20, 2014, at 4:06 PM, Eoghan Glynn egl...@redhat.commailto:egl...@redhat.com wrote: How about allowing the caller to specify what level of detail they require via the Accept header? ▶ GET /prefix/resource_name Accept: application/json; detail=concise The Accept request-header field can

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] APIImpact flag for specs

I’ve also added APIImpact flag info to the Git Commit Messages page [1]. Everett [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/GitCommitMessages#Including_external_references On Nov 19, 2014, at 5:23 PM, Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.commailto:everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote: On Nov 13

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] API-WG meeting (note time change this week)

On Nov 19, 2014, at 4:56 AM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, We have moved to alternating times each week for the API WG meeting so people from other timezones can attend. Since this is an odd week the meeting will be Thursday UTC 1600. Details here:

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Cross-Project Liaison for the API Working Group

On Nov 16, 2014, at 4:59 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote: My 2c is we should say The liason should be the PTL or whomever they delegate to be their representative and not mention anything about the person needing to be a core developer. It removes any ambiguity about who

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Summit summary

Does anybody know what happened to the Etherpad? It’s completely blank now!!! If you check the Timeslider, it appears that it only ever existed on Nov. 15. Bizarre. Everett On Nov 14, 2014, at 5:05 PM, Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote: Hi All, Here’s a summary of what

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] APIImpact flag for specs

On Nov 13, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.commailto:everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote: On Nov 12, 2014, at 10:45 PM, Angus Salkeld asalk...@mirantis.commailto:asalk...@mirantis.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Everett Toews everett.to

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] API-WG meeting (note time change this week)

By the way, I’m off the next couple of days so I won’t be able to attend this meeting. See you! Everett On Nov 19, 2014, at 4:56 AM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, We have moved to alternating times each week for the API WG meeting so people from other timezones can

[openstack-dev] [api] Cross-Project Liaison for the API Working Group

Hello PTLs of Ceilometer, Heat, Horizon, and Trove, The purpose of the API Working Group [1] is to propose, discuss, review, and advocate for API guidelines for all OpenStack Programs to follow. We’re seeking API subject matter experts and a cross-project liaison [2] for each project to

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Cross-Project Liaison for the API Working Group

On Nov 14, 2014, at 1:43 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/14/2014 05:13 PM, Everett Toews wrote: The liaison should be a core reviewer for the project, but does not need to be the PTL. By default, the liaison will be the PTL. ]Anyway, the outcome of the email exchange

[openstack-dev] [api] Summit summary

Hi All, Here’s a summary of what happened at the Summit from the API Working Group perspective. Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-api-wg The 2 design summit sessions on Tuesday were very well attended, maybe 100ish people I’m guessing. I got the impression there

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] APIImpact flag for specs

On Nov 12, 2014, at 10:45 PM, Angus Salkeld asalk...@mirantis.commailto:asalk...@mirantis.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.commailto:everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote: Hi All, Chris Yeoh started the use of an APIImpact flag in commit messages

[openstack-dev] [api] Meeting Reminder for API Working Group: Thursday at 00:00 UTC

Here’s the agenda [1] for our upcoming meeting. Everett [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/API-WG#Agenda ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [api] API Working Group sessions

The schedule for the Paris sessions has been finalized and the API Working Group has two design summit sessions and one follow up session on Thursday! Part 1 Tuesday November 4, 2014 11:15 - 11:55 Room: Manet http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/event/13fc460f359646dcd41d6a2d7ad0bec0 Part 2

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] API Working Group sessions

Link to the follow up session Thursday November 6, 2014 16:30 - 18:00 Room: Hyatt - Vendome room (Hyatt Hotel) http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/event/3f0a5f22f2d641ef69965373f3e23983 Everett On Oct 31, 2014, at 11:19 AM, Everett Toews everett.to...@rackspace.com wrote: The schedule

[openstack-dev] [api] APIImpact flag for specs

Hi All, Chris Yeoh started the use of an APIImpact flag in commit messages for specs in Nova. It adds a requirement for an APIImpact flag in the commit message for a proposed spec if it proposes changes to the REST API. This will make it much easier for people such as the API Working Group who

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] API Workgroup git repository

I notice at the top of the GitHub mirror page [1] it reads, API Working Group http://openstack.org” Can we get that changed to API Working Group https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/API_Working_Group”? That URL would be much more helpful to people who come across the GitHub repo. It's not a code

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] APIImpact flag for nova specs

On Oct 15, 2014, at 5:52 AM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.commailto:cbky...@gmail.com wrote: We don't require new templates as part of nova-specs and api changes don't necessarily change the api sample tpl files. We do ask for some jsonschema descriptions of the new APIs input but they work

Re: [openstack-dev] [api] Forming the API Working Group

On Oct 14, 2014, at 8:57 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: I personally think proposing patches to an openstack-api repository is the most effective way to make those proposals. Etherpads and wiki pages are fine for dumping content, but IMO, we don't need to dump content -- we already

[openstack-dev] [api] Forming the API Working Group

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/API_Working_Group This is the start of the API Working Group (API WG). To avoid bike shedding over the name of the working group, I decided to title the wiki page API Working Group. Simple, to the point, and avoids loaded terms like standards, best practices,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [All] API standards working group

On Sep 24, 2014, at 9:42 AM, Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com wrote: I'll bring an API consumer's perspective. +1 I’d bring an API consumer’s perspective as well. Looks like there’s lots of support for an API WG. What’s the next step? Form a WG under the User Committee [1] or is there

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] [All] API standards working group

On Sep 24, 2014, at 12:02 PM, Tim Bell tim.b...@cern.ch wrote: Seems like there is some overlap with the end user (i.e. consumer) working group at https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/End_User_Working_Group Sounds like it would be worth discussing with them on how to focus on these needs. The

  1   2   >