[openstack-dev] [api] header non proliferation (that naming thing, _again_)

Jay Pipes jaypipes at gmail.com
Mon Feb 22 12:17:44 UTC 2016

On 02/22/2016 07:00 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 02/21/2016 01:41 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
>> On 02/21/2016 12:50 PM, Chris Dent wrote:
>>> In a recent api-wg meeting I set forth the idea that it is both a
>>> bad idea to add lots of different headers and to add headers which
>>> have meaning in the name of the header (rather than just the value).
>>> This proved to a bit confusing, so I was asked to write it up. I
>>> did:
>>>       https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280381/
>>> When I did, the best example for how _not_ to do things is the way in
>>> which we are currently doing microversion headers.
>>> So two questions:
>>> * Is my position on header non proliferation right?
>> Yes, I believe so.
>>> * Is it so right that we should consider doing microversions
>>>     differently?
>> Ship has sailed on a number of things, including this. I *do* think it
>> would be great to just use OpenStack-API-Version: $SERVICE_TYPE X.Y,
>> however we'll need to add another microversion to support that of
>> course. Isn't it ironic? Don't you think?
> Actually, the headers can't be fully fixed in a microversion, because
> they are deep in the negotiation. We're stuck maintaining the old
> headers pretty much forever.

My website doesn't support IE6 any more. Why? Because I don't care to 
support IE6 users. At some point, developers of things need to be able 
to move on. After some deprecation period (long though it can be), we 
should be able to remove legacy cruft.


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list