Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

On 06/21/2016 10:27 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 06/21/2016 10:47 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > >> >> I'll agree with Clint here, and give an example. >> >> When I talk to Nova and get a detail record for a server, Nova talks to >> Neutron and puts data that it receives into the addresses dict on the

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

On 06/21/2016 10:47 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: > > I'll agree with Clint here, and give an example. > > When I talk to Nova and get a detail record for a server, Nova talks to > Neutron and puts data that it receives into the addresses dict on the > server record. This is not the neutron data

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

On 06/21/2016 12:59 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Edward Leafe's message of 2016-06-20 20:41:56 -0500: >> On Jun 18, 2016, at 9:03 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: >> >>> Whatever API version is used behind the compute API is none of the user's >>> business. >> >> Actually, yeah,

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

On 06/21/2016 01:59 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Edward Leafe's message of 2016-06-20 20:41:56 -0500: >> On Jun 18, 2016, at 9:03 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: >> >>> Whatever API version is used behind the compute API is none of the user's >>> business. >> >> Actually, yeah,

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

Excerpts from Edward Leafe's message of 2016-06-20 20:41:56 -0500: > On Jun 18, 2016, at 9:03 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > > > Whatever API version is used behind the compute API is none of the user's > > business. > > Actually, yeah, it is. > > If I write an app or a tool that

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

On 21 June 2016 at 11:41, Edward Leafe wrote: > On Jun 18, 2016, at 9:03 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > > > Whatever API version is used behind the compute API is none of the user's > > business. > > Actually, yeah, it is. > > If I write an app or a tool that expects

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

On Jun 18, 2016, at 9:03 AM, Clint Byrum wrote: > Whatever API version is used behind the compute API is none of the user's > business. Actually, yeah, it is. If I write an app or a tool that expects to send information in a certain format, and receive responses in a certain

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

FYI, Cinder implemented using the style recommended by the API-wg: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224910 From: Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 6:32:10 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Version

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

On 06/18/2016 06:32 AM, Jamie Lennox wrote: > Quick question: why do we need the service type or name in there? You > really should know what API you're talking to already and it's just > something that makes it more difficult to handle all the different APIs > in a common way. It is also

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

; > *From: *Steve Martinelli <s.martine...@gmail.com> > *Reply-To: *"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage > questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > *Date: *Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 6:22 AM > *To: *"OpenStack Development Mailing

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Date: Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 6:22 AM To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subje

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

On Sat, 18 Jun 2016, Jamie Lennox wrote: Quick question: why do we need the service type or name in there? You really should know what API you're talking to already and it's just something that makes it more difficult to handle all the different APIs in a common way. The basic idea is so that

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

Excerpts from Henry Nash's message of 2016-06-18 13:14:17 +0100: > > On 18 Jun 2016, at 11:32, Jamie Lennox wrote: > > > > Quick question: why do we need the service type or name in there? You > > really should know what API you're talking to already and it's just > >

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

…I think it is so you can have a header in a request that, once issued, can be passed for service to service, e.g.: OpenStack-API-Version: identity 3.7, compute 2.11 Henry > On 18 Jun 2016, at 11:32, Jamie Lennox wrote: > > Quick question: why do we need the service

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

Quick question: why do we need the service type or name in there? You really should know what API you're talking to already and it's just something that makes it more difficult to handle all the different APIs in a common way. On Jun 18, 2016 8:25 PM, "Steve Martinelli"

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

Looks like Manila is using the service name instead of type (X-OpenStack-Manila-API-Version) according to this link anyway: http://docs.openstack.org/developer/manila/devref/api_microversion_dev.html Keystone can follow the cross project spec and use the service type (Identity instead of

Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:29 AM, Henry Nash wrote: > We are currently in the process of implementing microversion support in > keystone - and are obviously trying to follow the cross-projec spec for this >

[openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

Hi We are currently in the process of implementing microversion support in keystone - and are obviously trying to follow the cross-projec spec for this (http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/guidelines/microversion_specification.html