/api is ok. It takes a non trivial amount of time to make this change. I would not want to hold up the release for this. We can easily add support for /api in addition to /api in the next release
On Jul 4, 2017 08:35, "Jan Høydahl" <jan....@cominvent.com> wrote: > I’ll let this email thread run a little bit longer to gather different > views. > Then in a few days we can try to discover a consensus and create a JIRA. > > I think that the effort gone into moving Solr to root context allows us > great flexibility, whatever naming we want. > As I said, I don’t think an app like Solr needs to keep older API versions > alive for more than one major version, like a public web service API would > need. > > In 7.x we’ll have both /api/ and (deprecated) /solr > In 8.x we’ll have only /api/ (?) > > If we then in e.g. 12.x want to introduce a v3 thing, we could map it to > /api/v3 and move it to /api/ in 13.x, with /api/v3 as an alias. > We could even let users configure “v2RootPath” and “v3RootPath” at will if > they need to adapt to some client need and do not want to use a reverse > proxy for that. > > -- > Jan Høydahl, search solution architect > Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > > 3. jul. 2017 kl. 22.57 skrev Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net>: > > Also, if someone has the time to take this up, can you please create a > JIRA and mark is a usability blocker for 7.0 release ? > > -Anshum > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 1:55 PM Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net> > wrote: > >> +1 to not having v2. I don't have a personal preference between the >> suggestions by Shawn, and Jan, so like David, either of them would be great. >> >> -Anshum >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 6:59 AM Jan Høydahl <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 >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>> >>> >
