That's true. I don't believe the design itself is REST. It's http call but to me it's a much simpler transition path than coming up with a full REST for the agents. I don't think we necessarily need full REST for the agents because they're not really full services anyways.
The http calls just allow for JSON format on top http instead of cloudstack's proprietary protocol. That's a significant upgrade in of itself. With Donal's design here, someone can easily change AgentManager in CloudStack to utilize this. I think it strikes a good compromise. --Alex > -----Original Message----- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 6:39 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] RESTful API for CloudStack agents > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 11:44:33AM +0100, Donal Lafferty wrote: > > Sorry for the delay in responding. > > > > The GET / POST limit to HTTP verbs simplifies exposing the agent with HTML > forms. Using these verbs the agent interface can be exposed via HTML > forms should the developer want to use a browser for diagnostics, > experimentation or testing. IIRC, HTML 5 expands set of acceptable methods, > but sticking to HTML 4's GET/POST limit removes the HTML 5 limit. > > > > Understood, but can't testing be done via a tool like curl just as easily? > Being > constrained by a presentation layer spec for an app to app integration seems > odd. > > I'm not totally against your URI design, I just don't particularly love it. > It's > really just HTTP, so let's not call it REST at all if we go down that path.
