Would you mind filing a bug for the repo update case you bring up?
I'd like to have it tracked that it was reported from a user and so
we can align it to a sprint to fix it.
Today, I filed a couple of bug reports for things I encountered, while
working with the API during the last few weeks.
Is it more or less stable and
functional, or will there be heavy changes in the near future?
The answer is two-fold.
We're gearing up for a v1.0 release. The Katello project will be
using our APIs and may require some changes be made for that 1.0
release. For the most part, the APIs should remain relatively stable
for that release.
After that, the APIs are going to drastically change as we refactor
the daylights out of Pulp to support non-RPM content. A lot is going
to change for that, but that is still months away.
Actually for most of the things I wanted to do with the api, it
already proved to be very useful. I just had to figure out, that I
should probably also sometimes look into the code to verify the
documentation or to get an extended insight into what happens as the
request is processed.
So the only things I could mention for the v2 of the API (amongst the
things I filed bug reports):
* be consistent amongst all parts of your api, this makes using it a
lot easier and less cumbersome. Consistency in terms of how resources
are addressed or what they return on the same kind of request.
* provide nice documentation with good (response) examples. :)
I know that good documentation is hard, so I hope to be helpful by
pointing at things that are not clear for a user.
Thanks a lot!
~pete
_______________________________________________
Pulp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list
