Regarding Jay's proposal, this would be tantamount to defining an API
action for retrieving instances, something currently being discussed here
[1].
The only comment I have is that I am not entirely surely whether using the
POST verb for operations which do no alter at all the server
> On 4 Nov 2015, at 13:13, Salvatore Orlando wrote:
>
> Regarding Jay's proposal, this would be tantamount to defining an API action
> for retrieving instances, something currently being discussed here [1].
> The only comment I have is that I am not entirely surely
On 11/03/2015 05:45 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03 2015, Jay Pipes wrote:
>
>> My suggestion was to add a new POST /servers/search URI resource that can
>> take
>> a request body containing large numbers of filter arguments, encoded in a
>> JSON
>> object.
>>
>> API working group,
Inline,
Salvatore
On 4 November 2015 at 15:11, Cory Benfield wrote:
>
> > On 4 Nov 2015, at 13:13, Salvatore Orlando
> wrote:
> >
> > Regarding Jay's proposal, this would be tantamount to defining an API
> action for retrieving instances, something
Hi all,
A spec [1] that proposes adding a new server_ids query string parameter
to the existing GET /servers/detail URI resource has highlighted an
interesting issue.
The point of the spec is to add an ability to filter the results for the
GET /servers/detail API call to a specified set of
On Tue, Nov 03 2015, Jay Pipes wrote:
> My suggestion was to add a new POST /servers/search URI resource that can take
> a request body containing large numbers of filter arguments, encoded in a JSON
> object.
>
> API working group, what thoughts do you have about this? Please add your
> comments