Open Stack

On 07/09/2013 07:45 AM, Ken'ichi Ohmichi wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The blueprint "nova-api-validation-fw" has not been approved yet.
> I hope the core patch of this blueprint is merged to Havana-2,
> because of completing comprehensive API validation of Nova v3 API
> for Havana release. What should we do for it?

I apologize for taking so long to address this.

Here is my current take on this based on reviewing discussions, code,
and talking to others about it.

>From a high level, API input validation is obviously a good thing.
Having a common framework to do it is better.  What complicates this
submission is the effort to standardize on Pecan/WSME for APIs
throughout OpenStack.

We've discussed WSME and jsonschema on the mailing list.  There are
perhaps some things that can be expressed using jsonschema, but not WSME
today.  So, there are some notes on
https://etherpad.openstack.org/NovaApiValidationFramework showing how
the two could be used together at some point.  However, I don't think
it's really desirable long term.  It seems a bit awkward, and some
information gets duplicated.

We had previously established that using WSME was the long term goal
here.  Going forward with jsonschema with the current nova APIs is a
benefit in the short term, but I do not think it's necessarily in
support of the long term goal if there isn't consensus that combining
WSME+jsonschema is a good idea.

This sort of thing affects a lot of code, so the direction is important.
 I do not think we should proceed with this.  It seems like the best
thing to do that helps the long term goal is to work on migrating our
API to WSME.   In particular, I think we could do this for the v3 API,
since it's not going to be locked down until Icehouse.  At the same
time, we should contribute back to WSME to add the features we feel are
missing to allow the types of validation we would like to do.

If there is significant disagreement with this decision, I'm happy to
continue talking about it.  However, I really want to see consensus on
this and how it fits in with the long term goals before moving forward.

-- 
Russell Bryant