}
Regards.
From: Nitin Mehta [nitin.me...@citrix.com]
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 9:08 AM
To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
Cc: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Enforcing UUID string in API query
Hi Rohit,
I didn't understand the rationale behind this.
lidated.
>>
>> Will
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:44 PM
>>> To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.
stack-...@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Enforcing UUID string in API query
> >
> > Sorry I don't understand why it needs to be a vote. Why can't we just offer
> > a flag to turn it on and off?
> >
-1. At the least we need to depreciate over time, but if at all possible, would
be good to know how many folks are using the existing internal ID.
John
On Dec 27, 2012, at 12:11 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm asking for the community to vote if they want to enforce UUID string to
> be
-Original Message-
>>> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@citrix.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:11 PM
>>> To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: [VOTE] Enforcing UUID st
be tested and validated.
Will
> -Original Message-
> From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:44 PM
> To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Enforcing UUID st
anks all for your comments.
Regards.
>
> --Alex
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:11 PM
>> To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.or
;> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:11 PM
>> To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: [VOTE] Enforcing UUID string in API query
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm asking for the community to vote if they want to
On 12/27/2012 02:11 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
Hi,
-1 with a comment: To deprecate an api function, you have two methods
(probably more, but these are common):
1. overload the function to accept both UUID and ID, which gives you
backwards compatibility forever, but is cumbersome to maintain.
2.
ubator.apache.org
> Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Enforcing UUID string in API query
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm asking for the community to vote if they want to enforce UUID string to
> be used in parameters while querying an API. This would break any cli
is is
just not practical.
Will
> -Original Message-
> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:11 PM
> To: cloudstack-...@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] Enforcing UUID stri
Forgot to mention, let's keep the voting period open till 7th Jan 2013 12:00
GMT, i.e. as a lot of people are offline.
On 27-Dec-2012, at 12:11 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm asking for the community to vote if they want to enforce UUID string to
> be used in parameters while querying a
Hi,
I'm asking for the community to vote if they want to enforce UUID string to be
used in parameters while querying an API. This would break any client or script
that uses internal ID. AFAIK api response (json or xml, since 3.x for sure)
always have had UUIDs so if any client/script that uses
13 matches
Mail list logo
