Thanks Shawn, David and Ishan. Don’t know how to interpret the silence. Does it mean that the rest of you believe /v2/ is the best naming?
My intention is not to spark a discussion war, but to make sure there is consensus on this before 7.0 release. -- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > 16. jun. 2017 kl. 21.58 skrev Ishan Chattopadhyaya > <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>: > > My concern with /api is that handling backcompats between versions (v2 to v3 > etc.) is problematic; and if we decide not to support backcompat, then it > could be a source of confusion for the user. > > I'm +1 for /v2 or /api/v2 (and v3 etc. going forward). > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 10:53 PM, David Smiley <david.w.smi...@gmail.com > <mailto:david.w.smi...@gmail.com>> wrote: > +1 to remove the "v2" in the URL or make it an optional add-on (e.g. /api or > /api/v2). Any/all of the proposals by Jan & Shawn sound reasonable to me. > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 9:59 AM Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com > <mailto:jan....@cominvent.com>> wrote: > Hi, > > Now that we’re getting used to thinking localhost:8983/v2/ as the new api > entry point, just one silly question: > > Will we ever move beyond /v2/ to /v3/? > > The answer may seem obvious to many of you and may have consensus in some > looong JIRA discussion that I did not follow. > > But I have a sneaking feeling that we’ll still be at /v2/ 5 years from now > and that we’ll use other mechanisms for > making breaking changes in one or more of the APIs, rather than bumping the > main entry point, which has a high cost. > In this regard I believe perhaps Solr as an app is different from any > publicly available SAAS out on the internet, > and if someone needed to publish a Solr search to a bunch of unknown clients > they would not expose Solr to those > clients but rather their own proxy, and the whole /v2, /v3 thing would be > controlled by their API layer above Solr. > > Feel free to shoot me down, but is localhost:8983/api/ a more honest naming > for v2? > * It looks much better > * It is intuitive to everyone > * It never gets outdated > * We can still move to /api/v3 or anything else in the future if so be > > So if my gut feeling is wrong here, please tell me a likely event in, say > Solr8 that would warrant a /v3 in parallel > with /v2. If this is something that will happen once every 5 years and not > once every major version, then perhaps > other ways of versioning is more appropriate? (HTTP headers?, API paths > /api/c/foo/backup2 ...)? > > -- > Jan Høydahl, search solution architect > Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com <http://www.cominvent.com/> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > <mailto:dev-h...@lucene.apache.org> > > -- > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > <http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley> | Book: > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > <http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com/>
