Open Stack

On 8/19/2015 1:33 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
>
>
> 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.
>

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/173985/ doesn't require a version bump 
for the same reasons, IMO.  If people are hung up on 400 vs 403 in that 
change, just make it a 400, we do it both ways in the compute API.

-- 

Thanks,

Matt Riedemann