Open Stack

On 8/19/2015 12:18 PM, Chen CH Ji wrote:
> In doing [1] [2], some suggestions raised that those kind of change need
> microversion bump which is fine
> however, another concern raised on whether we need combine a set of
> those kind of changes (which may only change some error code) into one
> bump ?
>
> apparently there are pros and cons for doing so, combine makes API
> version bump not that frequent for minor changes
> but makes it hard to review and backport ... so any suggestions on how
> to handle ? Thanks
>
>
> [1]https://review.openstack.org/#/c/198753/
> [2]https://review.openstack.org/#/c/173985/
>
> Best Regards!
>
> Kevin (Chen) Ji 纪 晨
>
> Engineer, zVM Development, CSTL
> Notes: Chen CH Ji/China/IBM at IBMCN   Internet: jichenjc at cn.ibm.com
> Phone: +86-10-82454158
> Address: 3/F Ring Building, ZhongGuanCun Software Park, Haidian
> District, Beijing 100193, PRC
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>

I don't see why https://review.openstack.org/#/c/198753/ would require a 
microversion bump.  We've always allowed handling 500s and turning them 
into more appropriate error codes, like a 400 in this case.

As noted:

http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/guidelines/evaluating_api_changes.html

"Changing an error response code to be more accurate." is generally 
acceptable.

-- 

Thanks,

Matt Riedemann