> Sure, but that's still functionally equivalent to using the /v2 prefix. > So we could chuck the current /v3 code and do: > > /v2: Current thing > /v3: invalid, not supported > /v4: added simple task return for server create > /v5: added the event extension > /v6: added a new event for cinder to the event extension > > and it would be equivalent.
Yep, sure. This seems more likely to confuse people or clients to me, but if that's how we decided to do it, then that's fine. The approach to _what_ we version is my concern. > And arguably, anything that is a pure "add" could get away with either a > minor version or not touching the version at all. Only "remove" or > "modify" should have the potential to break a properly-written application. Totally agree! --Dan _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev