On 03/12/2015 05:09 PM, John Dickinson wrote:
On Mar 12, 2015, at 12:48 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/12/2015 03:08 PM, John Dickinson wrote:
I'd like a little more info here.
Is Horizon relying on the X-Timestamp header for reads (GET/HEAD)? If so, I
think that's somewhat
On Mar 12, 2015, at 12:48 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/12/2015 03:08 PM, John Dickinson wrote:
I'd like a little more info here.
Is Horizon relying on the X-Timestamp header for reads (GET/HEAD)? If so, I
think that's somewhat odd, but not hugely problematic. Swift has
On 03/12/2015 03:08 PM, John Dickinson wrote:
I'd like a little more info here.
Is Horizon relying on the X-Timestamp header for reads (GET/HEAD)? If so, I
think that's somewhat odd, but not hugely problematic. Swift has been returning
an X-Timestamp header since patch b20264c9d3196 (which
I'd like a little more info here.
Is Horizon relying on the X-Timestamp header for reads (GET/HEAD)? If so, I
think that's somewhat odd, but not hugely problematic. Swift has been returning
an X-Timestamp header since patch b20264c9d3196 (which landed 3 years ago --
April 2012).
The
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Matthew Farina m...@mattfarina.com wrote:
David,
FYI, the last time I chatted with John Dickinson I learned there are
numerous API elements not documented. Not meant to be private but the docs
have not kept up. How should we handle that?
I've read through
David,
FYI, the last time I chatted with John Dickinson I learned there are
numerous API elements not documented. Not meant to be private but the docs
have not kept up. How should we handle that?
Thanks,
Matt Farina
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 5:25 PM, David Lyle dkly...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree
Thanks very much, David, appreciated!
-jay
On 03/07/2015 02:25 PM, David Lyle wrote:
I agree that Horizon should not be requiring optional headers. Changing
status of bug.Â
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com
mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
Added [swift] to
I agree that Horizon should not be requiring optional headers. Changing
status of bug.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
Added [swift] to topic.
On 03/03/2015 07:41 AM, Matthew Farina wrote:
Radoslaw,
Unfortunately the documentation for OpenStack has some
Added [swift] to topic.
On 03/03/2015 07:41 AM, Matthew Farina wrote:
Radoslaw,
Unfortunately the documentation for OpenStack has some holes. What you
are calling a private API may be something missed in the documentation.
Is there a documentation bug on the issue? If not one should be
