Open Stack

On 4 June 2015 at 10:40, Jens Rosenboom <j.rosenboom at x-ion.de> wrote:
> 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?

We can do this in a separate bug fix if you prefer.

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

Stopping things silently fail, is exactly the kind of change I want to
see us do more of in v2.1.
I see it as a follow up on all the JSON schema validation we have added.

Thanks,
John