Open Stack

2015-06-03 14:25 GMT+02:00 John Garbutt <john at johngarbutt.com>:
> On 3 June 2015 at 12:52, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 06/03/2015 02:34 AM, Chris Friesen wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/03/2015 12:16 AM, Jens Rosenboom wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm wondering though whether the current API behaviour here should be
>>>> changed more generally. Is there a plausible reason to silently
>>>> discard options that are not allowed for non-admins? For me it would
>>>> make more sense to return an error in that case.
>>>
>>>
>>> If we're bumping the microversion anyways, I'd be in favor of having
>>> that throw an error rather than silently ignore options.
>>>
>>> You could maybe even have a helpful "those options require admin
>>> privileges" error message that gets displayed to the user.
>>
>> ++
>
> +1
>
> We must keep adding this sort of validation as we evolve v2.1
>
> This is a one of the big changes in the "default behaviour" since
> v2.0, validate input, and make things discoverable, rather than
> silently fail.

O.k., but can we agree that this will be a second step which can be
handled after the current bugfix-microversion-spec?

IIUC we cannot change the behaviour for the old API anyway, so this
would only affect the remaining admin-only options.