If the Query API isn't tested well, this is also an issue. Since EC2 ecosystem by-in-large don't use SOAP interfaces, any faults in the Query API should be treated with higher priority, than SOAP anyway. I'm happy to help testing the Query interface, especially if it gets us closer to deleting the SOAP one.
-A On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com>wrote: > From Chiradeep's note: > > > Currently the EC2 API layer implements both the WSDL interface as well as > > the Query API. > > However the Query API is not well tested. > > So removing the SOAP interface would leave us with the query API... > which would then need testing. > > Am I misunderstanding? > > -chip > > On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Ewan Mellor <ewan.mel...@eu.citrix.com> > wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > >> Sent: 02 August 2012 07:58 > >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: ec2 API compatibility (WSDL vs Query) > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Adrian Cole <adrian.f.c...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > Just curious. > >> > > >> > If this is the first apache release, and cloudbridge was formerly in a > >> > different repo, why don't we just rip out the SOAP interface? That's > >> > a heck of a lot simpler than deprecating the first version of > something. > >> > > >> > -A > >> > >> I think we are saying the same thing. In this case, deprecate = rip it > out. > > > > Are we saying that? We've got 6 working days of general development > time before we start locking down for a release. Can we get the query API > implemented in that time? > > > > Regarding the specific licensing issue, Prachi is looking at what > happens when we remove the WSDLs. The server stubs are already in the code > base, so in theory we shouldn't need the WSDLs to be present anyway. > Prachi is looking at whether that's true. > > > > Ewan. > > > > >
