On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
On 01/14/2014 05:17 AM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net
This skirts the run time issue, but using twice as many resources. It
doesn't however address the fact that real
On 2014年01月14日 20:04, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote:
Hi,
2014/1/14 Alex Xu x...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
+1 for drop xml. But if we can't drop it, can we think about use
XMLDictSerializer instead of XmlTemplate? We spend a lot of time to maintain
XmlTemplate, and it make xml
format inconsistent(some of
] drop XML from v3 API entirely
...
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
On 01/15/2014 08:44 AM, Tim Bell wrote:
Is the impact of dropping XML understood for the users of the OpenStack APIs ?
That was the rationale for the openstack@ thread on this as well.
I believe the impact on users will be more reliable Nova API for users.
It will also mean a more clear surface
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
I know we've been here before, but I want to raise this again while there
is still time left in icehouse.
I would like to propose that the Nova v3 API removes the XML payload
entirely. It adds complexity to the Nova code, and
+1 for drop xml. But if we can't drop it, can we think about use
XMLDictSerializer instead of XmlTemplate? We spend a lot of time to
maintain XmlTemplate, and it make xml
format inconsistent(some of resouce's attribute is output as xml
sub-element, some of them is output as xml element's
Hi,
2014/1/14 Alex Xu x...@linux.vnet.ibm.com:
+1 for drop xml. But if we can't drop it, can we think about use
XMLDictSerializer instead of XmlTemplate? We spend a lot of time to maintain
XmlTemplate, and it make xml
format inconsistent(some of resouce's attribute is output as xml
On 01/13/2014 10:38 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
I know we've been here before, but I want to raise this again while
there is still time left in icehouse.
I would like to propose that the Nova v3 API removes the XML payload
entirely. It adds complexity to the Nova code, and it requires
duplicating
On 01/14/2014 10:37 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 01/13/2014 10:38 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
I know we've been here before, but I want to raise this again while
there is still time left in icehouse.
I would like to propose that the Nova v3 API removes the XML payload
entirely. It adds complexity to
On 01/14/2014 10:50 AM, David Kranz wrote:
On 01/14/2014 10:37 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
On 01/13/2014 10:38 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
I know we've been here before, but I want to raise this again while
there is still time left in icehouse.
I would like to propose that the Nova v3 API removes
+1 to drop XML from v3 API
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote:
I know we've been here before, but I want to raise this again while there is
still time left in icehouse.
I would like to propose that the Nova v3 API removes the XML payload
entirely. It adds
I'm not really an active nova contributor as of yet, but I'll +1 this if nova's
XML support is anything like what I see in trove (which I believe just cloned
how nova did it in the first place). XML without a schema is terrible for a
serialization format. In my experience, the only people who
On 01/13/2014 09:38 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
I know we've been here before, but I want to raise this again while
there is still time left in icehouse.
I would like to propose that the Nova v3 API removes the XML payload
entirely. It adds complexity to the Nova code, and it requires
duplicating
On 01/13/2014 10:13 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 01/13/2014 09:38 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
I know we've been here before, but I want to raise this again while
there is still time left in icehouse.
I would like to propose that the Nova v3 API removes the XML payload
entirely. It adds complexity
14 matches
Mail list logo
