On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> wrote:
> > > On 09/12/2013 04:33 PM, Steve Baker wrote: > > On 09/13/2013 08:28 AM, Mike Asthalter wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> Can someone please explain the plans for our 2 wadls moving forward: > >> > >> * wadl in original heat > >> repo: > https://github.com/openstack/heat/blob/master/doc/docbkx/api-ref/src/wadls/heat-api/src/heat-api-1.0.wadl > >> <%22 > https://github.com/openstack/heat/blob/master/doc/docbkx/api-ref/src/wadls/heat-api/src/heat-api-1 > .> > >> * wadl in api-site > >> repo: > https://github.com/openstack/api-site/blob/master/api-ref/src/wadls/orchestration-api/src/v1/orchestration-api.wadl > >> > > The original intention was to delete the heat wadl when the api-site one > > became merged. > Sounds good. > >> 1. Is there a need to maintain 2 wadls moving forward, with the wadl > >> in the original heat repo containing calls that may not be > >> implemented, and the wadl in the api-site repo containing implemented > >> calls only? > >> > >> Anne Gentle advises as follows in regard to these 2 wadls: > >> > >> "I'd like the WADL in api-site repo to be user-facing. The other > >> WADL can be truth if it needs to be a specification that's not yet > >> implemented. If the WADL in api-site repo is true and implemented, > >> please just maintain one going forward." > >> > >> > >> 2. If we maintain 2 wadls, what are the consequences (gerrit reviews, > >> docs out of sync, etc.)? > >> > >> 3. If we maintain only the 1 orchestration wadl, how do we want to > >> pull in the wadl content to the api-ref doc > >> ( > https://github.com/openstack/heat/blob/master/doc/docbkx/api-ref/src/docbkx/api-ref.xml > >> <%22 > https://github.com/openstack/heat/blob/master/doc/docbkx/api-ref/src/docb > >) > >> from the orchestration wadl in the api-site repo: subtree merge, other? > >> > >> > Thanks Mike for asking these questions. I've been asking the infrastructure team for help with pulling content like the current nova request/response examples into the api-site repo. No subtree merges please. We'll find some way. Right now it's manual. > > These are good questions, and could apply equally to other out-of-tree > > docs as features get added during the development cycle. > > > > I still think that our wadl should live only in api-site. If api-site > > has no branching policy to maintain separate Havana and Icehouse > > versions then maybe Icehouse changes should be posted as WIP reviews > > until they can be merged. > > I believe there is no branching in api-site because it's describing API > and there is no such thing as a havana or icehouse version of an API - > there are the API versions and they are orthogonal to server release > versions. At least in theory. :) > Yep, that's our working theory. :) Anne > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- Anne Gentle annegen...@justwriteclick.com
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
