Open Stack

2015-06-26 4:21 GMT+09:00 Dean Troyer <dtroyer at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:
>>
>> For someone that's extremely familiar with what they are doing, they'll
>> understand that http://service.provider/compute is Nova, and can find
>> their way to Nova docs on the API. But for new folks, I can only see
>> this adding to confusion.
>
>
> Anyone using the REST API directly has already gotten an endpoint from the
> service catalog using the service type (I'm ignoring the deprecated 'name'
> field).  The version header should match up directly to the type used to get
> the endpoint.

Yeah, I had the same thinking.
Based on it, we can remove generic name(compute, identity, etc) from
API microversions header.

But now I feel it is fine to use the generic name if the name is
allocated quickly just after a project is created and the name is
stable.
JSON-Home also needs something for representing each project in a
response payload like:

http://docs.openstack.org/api/openstack-identity/3/rel
http://docs.openstack.org/api/openstack-compute/2.1/rel

for the relationship.
So even if we can remove the name from microversion header, we need
something for representing each project.
I tend to prefer generic name(compute, identity, etc) because the name
seems stable.

I push this to api-wg guidline[1] for cross projects.

Thanks
Ken Ohmichi

---

[1]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/196918/