Good idea.

I'll create a new wiki page for this topic. Is it possible to create wiki pages 
that are not public until the new REST API would be released?

Regards
Jan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ernst Developer [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Dienstag, 30. Oktober 2012 12:52
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: REST Interface
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This is a great improvement: +1
> 
> On remark though. I would like to suggest to make a list on the wiki of the
> mapping of the current REST API to the new REST API. This will be very useful
> when migrating from a previous version.
> 
> Regards,
> Ernst
> 
> 2012/10/30 Jan Bernhardt <[email protected]>
> 
> > Hi @all,
> >
> > I'm currently working on replacing Spring Webservice Stack with CXF.
> > By doing this I discovered a couple of issues, that I would like to
> > discuss here.
> >
> >
> > 1.       Syncope's REST API is only defined throw classes. My suggestion
> > would be to extract Interfaces from these Classes and place these in a
> > new package 'org.apache.syncope.core.rest.api'. All REST and security
> > annotations would be located with the interface.
> > By doing this we would have a better chance to provide a stable REST
> > interface and allow others to provide their own implementations.
> >
> > 2.       Since replacing the WS-Stack will affect many classes, I would
> > like to use this opportunity and also refactor the REST URLs to become
> > more RESTfull-Style. Currently there are URLs like '/create',
> > '/update' and '/delete/{roleId}'. I would like to refactor this to use
> > matching HTTP Operations (e.g. POST, PUT and DELETE), instead of
> > coding the operation name inside the URL.
> > Of course this will have a major effect on the REST API, but from my
> > point of view, these changes should be done rather sooner than later
> > (before many 3rd party solutions are using Syncope).
> > Of course we could make sure that this new REST API could still be
> > backwards compatible, but I would rather deliver the new REST API with
> > sufficient documentation within the next major release and not clutter
> > the new interfaces with backwards-compatible code.
> >
> > What are your thoughts?
> >
> > Best regards
> > Jan
> >
> >

Reply via email to