IMO #1 is the least confusing and easiest to use ... "makes it look that it's different resources" is one of those academic arguments made by people who don't get actual work done.
On Jan 8, 2011, at 11:50 AM, Pascal Robert wrote: > I will start building some REST services (bridge between clients and > CalDAV/Exchange servers) and I was wondering about what to do with services > versioning, AKA what to do when changes are required in the services that can > impact older clients. I want to avoid doing such changes, but we all know > that sometimes, it's a necessity. > > So, after doing a couple of Google search, it look like most people use one > of those ways to work with versioning of REST services. > > - Using a version number in the URLs (aka : /ra/v1/tasks) > - Using the Accept header and use a media type specific to the application > (vnd.myapp.service-v1, vnd.myapp.service-v2) > - Using a custom HTTP header (X-MYAPP-VERSION: v1) > > The last one (custom HTTP header) doesn't seem to be used by a lot of people, > and for the other twos, it look like it's a culture wars, some says that > putting API versions in the URL makes it look that it's a different > resources, others says that using media types is a PITA for nothing. > > Any opinions on this? Anyone tried to version their ERRest-backed services? > _______________________________________________ > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/mschrag%40pobox.com > > This email sent to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
