On 11/05/2012 12:03 PM, Tomas Lestach wrote: > ... > If there's a bug in the API call, we of course fix it. > But we try to keep the current API interface as is. Spacewalk users have > their > scripts using our API calls and we do not want to break the scripts by > renaming/deleting existing API calls. (Introducing of new sensefull APIs is > always good. :) > > So, it is important that the API behaves according to its name. It the name > and behavior do not match, we fix the behavior according to the name and can > introduce a new API in case the behavior of the original API was helpfull. > > However, internal naming has lower priority, because the users do not come > into contact with it, so it cannot be confusing for them. (But we of course > try to keep the naming sensefull as well.)
Ok, I might come up with a patch these days, fixing the existing API call so it behaves like its name is suggesting + maybe add a new call to provide the previous behavior in addition to that. Thanks for the explanations, Johannes -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer _______________________________________________ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
