Hi Andreas, welcome back ;) My answers are below, but from a release perspective I think we want to get a 2.5.1 out the door and then we can start on 3.0, which would allow some API changes.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Andreas Kohn <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm finally back to work a bit on shindig, but before submitting review > requests I think it would be nice to know which kind of API changes are > acceptable :) > > I have essentially 3 pending parts: > > 1. Change the MediaItems request parameters to match opensocial: currently > shindig expects the media item id in the 'mediaItemId' parameter, but > OpenSocial says it should be in the 'id' parameter instead. This change > would break the *RPC* API, the REST API would be unaffected. It could be > made to be compatible though by checking both parameter names. I like the solution of support both, and I am fine with that. Would the MediaItem interface change? This would be something I would not want to happen in 2.5.1. > > 2. Change the MediaItems (and others) 'tags' field from 'String' to > 'Array<String>'. This change again is coming from the OpenSocial standard, > but as it affects return values in the Java API getting it to be compatible > seems hard, if not impossible. Yeah agree this seems like it would change the interfaces. > > 3. Make it possible to inject a factory for CollectionOptions, which would > allow us to implement additional parameter handling without having to > replace both handler code and service interfaces. This is a change purely > on the Java API, a user would not be affected in any way. > This seems OK to me based on your description. Sounds like you would just be changing the underlying implementations. > Any advice would be appreciated :) > > Regards, > -- > Andreas
