On 06/25/2015 04:42 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote: > 2015-06-25 17:25 GMT+09:00 Lucas Alvares Gomes <lucasago...@gmail.com>: >> Hi, >> >>> If renaming "Ironic" to the other, is it still necessary to keep the >>> name in the header? >>> There are some projects which are already renamed like Neutron, Zaqar >>> and the others. >>> So "OpenStack-API-Version" which doesn't contain project name seems >>> reasonable for me. >> >> I don't think we should make decisions base on those cases, these are >> exceptions. > > I don't think so. > Renames of projects have already happened too many time even if we can > say "they are exceptions". > In big tent, the renames will happen more. > >> But even if it happens the name in the header is the least >> problematic thing. When a project is renamed, apart from the massive >> refactor in the code other things have to change, packaging, service >> files, etc... > > Internal implementation(like packaging, service files, directory > structures, etc) is not matter for end users at all. > API header is an interface between services to end users. > The area of influence of API header is much bigger than the implementation. > > Now I can see the first Jay's point. > Yeah, Nova and Ironic are implementations, and we cannot say "The > implementation rename never happens." because Neutron has happened. > >> For the headers you could have both, one with the old >> name and one with the new name for a while to give people time to >> migrate and then remove the old name. Just like deprecating other >> stuff, e.g a configuration option. > > That seems painful to end users. > So what is disagreeing point against "OpenStack-API-Version" here?
My concern remains that there is no such thing as an OpenStack-API-Version. There is no place to look it up. It's like asking for the OpenStack Database Version. This is a construct which is project scoped, and makes no sense outside of that project. For someone that's extremely familiar with what they are doing, they'll understand that http://service.provider/compute is Nova, and can find their way to Nova docs on the API. But for new folks, I can only see this adding to confusion. Being extra, and possibly redundantly, explicit here eliminates confusion. Our API is communication to our users, and I feel like at every point we should err on the side of what's going to be the most clear under the largest number of scenarios. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
