Excerpts from Edward Leafe's message of 2016-06-20 20:41:56 -0500: > On Jun 18, 2016, at 9:03 AM, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > > > Whatever API version is used behind the compute API is none of the user's > > business. > > Actually, yeah, it is. > > If I write an app or a tool that expects to send information in a certain > format, and receive responses in a certain format, I don't want that to > change when the cloud operator upgrades their system. I only want things to > change when I specifically request that they change by specifying a new > microversion. >
The things I get back in the compute API are the purview of the compute API, and nothing else. Before we go too far down this road, is there actually an example of one API providing a proxy to another directly? If so, is it something we think is actually a good idea? Because otherwise, the API I'm talking to needs to be clear about what it does and does not emit and/or accept. That contract would just be the microversion of the API I'm talking to. __________________________________________________________________________ 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
