On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Brian Rosmaita < brian.rosma...@rackspace.com> wrote:
> I don't know how elaborate we want to get here, but Everett Toews had an > interesting suggestion in the openstack-api channel. It would go something > like this: > > (1) User gets "/x1/search" endpoint from service catalog > (2) User does some request against /x1/search > (3) User receives 400 with an error message like: > This is an experimental API. > You must include the following header with your request: > x-openstack-api-status: acknowledged > By using this header, you acknowledge that while we think this API is > pretty solid, we reserve the right to make breaking changes as we analyze > usage patterns and API consumer comments during the experimental period. > Please send comments to the OpenStack Future Development Mailing List with > the subject "[Glance] x1 API". > To subscribe to the mailing list: > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > (4) User makes all subsequent requests including the > x-openstack-api-status header > What keeps me, as a shady client, from just including x-openstack-api-status from the start? and how is that different from intentionally selecting an EXPERIEMNTAL endpoint form the service catalog? > If we did something like that, my conscience would be completely clean if > we wound up introducing a breaking change. You also could do proper versioning even though it is experimental. That'll help prove the version handling is working properly too. As a dev trying to get early use on an experimental API, I still need to be able to detect when changes occur. dt -- Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
