The problem is that "not well tested" is likely to be code for "doesn't work and has never worked". If someone can convince me that it will be working in the next 2 weeks (1 week of open development, 1 week stability and bugfixing) then I'm happy to take that step and remove the SOAP API and declare 4.0 to be Query API only. If it can't be done in the next two weeks then we're talking about slipping the release, and no-one wants that.
Ewan. > -----Original Message----- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: 02 August 2012 08:37 > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Cc: Prachi Damle > Subject: Re: ec2 API compatibility (WSDL vs Query) > > 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. > > > >
