Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

I have updated the spec to use 409 in order to indicate the NamespaceNotEmptyException On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 7:12 PM Christian Thiel wrote: > +1 (non-binding) for the updated 409 Code > > On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 at 18:30, Ryan Blue wrote: > >> From the issue, it looks like we're using 400 for thi

Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

Thanks everyone for voting. The vote result is: +1: 5 (binding), 2 (non-binding) +0: 0 (binding), 0 (non-binding) -1: 0 (binding), 0 (non-binding) I'll get the proposed spec change merged. On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 4:15 AM Amogh Jahagirdar <2am...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for 409 > > On Tue, Mar 18

Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

+1 for 409 On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 5:11 PM Daniel Weeks wrote: > +1 as well for 409 > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 1:43 PM Ryan Blue wrote: > >> +1 for the updated 409 code. >> >> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 1:41 PM Yufei Gu wrote: >> >>> +1. Thanks Eduard! >>> >>> Yufei >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2

Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

+1 as well for 409 On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 1:43 PM Ryan Blue wrote: > +1 for the updated 409 code. > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 1:41 PM Yufei Gu wrote: > >> +1. Thanks Eduard! >> >> Yufei >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 3:46 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner < >> etudenhoef...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> I h

Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

+1. Thanks Eduard! Yufei On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 3:46 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner wrote: > I have updated the spec to use 409 in order to indicate the > NamespaceNotEmptyException > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 7:12 PM Christian Thiel < > christian.t.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1 (non-binding) for the

Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

+1 for the updated 409 code. On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 1:41 PM Yufei Gu wrote: > +1. Thanks Eduard! > > Yufei > > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 3:46 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner < > etudenhoef...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I have updated the spec to use 409 in order to indicate the >> NamespaceNotEmptyException

Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

+1 (non-binding) for the updated 409 Code On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 at 18:30, Ryan Blue wrote: > From the issue, it looks like we're using 400 for this because that's what > the Java client was returning as a generic or unhandled error. I don't > think that's a good reason to standardize on 400 now th

[VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

Hey everyone, I'd like to hold a quick VOTE on #12518 that improves the documentation around how *NamespaceNotEmptyException* is treated when a non-empty namespace is deleted. In such a case we do return a 400 and we also return a 400 on a bad request

Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

+1 (non binding) Regards JB On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 3:10 PM Eduard Tudenhöfner wrote: > > Hey everyone, > > I'd like to hold a quick VOTE on #12518 that improves the documentation > around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated when a non-empty namespace > is deleted. > In such a case we do

Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

>From the issue, it looks like we're using 400 for this because that's what the Java client was returning as a generic or unhandled error. I don't think that's a good reason to standardize on 400 now that we are calling out this error in the spec. Why not choose an error code that distinguishes it

Re: [VOTE] Improve OpenAPI documentation around how NamespaceNotEmptyException is treated

+1 On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 10:17 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > +1 (non binding) > > Regards > JB > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 3:10 PM Eduard Tudenhöfner > wrote: > > > > Hey everyone, > > > > I'd like to hold a quick VOTE on #12518 that improves the documentation > around how NamespaceNotEmpt