Open Stack

On 6/29/2016 10:10 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> On 6/29/2016 6:40 AM, Andrew Laski wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016, at 09:27 PM, Zhenyu Zheng wrote:
>>> How about I sync updated_at and created_at in my patch, and leave the
>>> finish to the other BP, by this way, I can use updated_at for the
>>> timestamp filter I added and it don't need to change again once the
>>> finish BP is complete.
>>
>> Sounds good to me.
>>
>
> It's been a long day so my memory might be fried, but the options we
> talked about in the API meeting were:
>
> 1. Setting updated_at = created_at when the instance action record is
> created. Laski likes this, I'm not crazy about it, especially since we
> don't do that for anything else.
>
> 2. Update the instance action's updated_at when instance action events
> are created. I like this since the instance action is like a parent
> resource and the event is the child, so when we create/modify an event
> we can consider it an update to the parent. Laski thought this might be
> weird UX given we don't expose instance action events in the REST API
> unless you're an admin. This is also probably not something we'd do for
> other related resources like server groups and server group members (but
> we don't page on those either right now).
>
> 3. Order the results by updated_at,created_at so that if updated_at
> isn't set for older records, created_at will be used. I think we all
> agreed in the meeting to do this regardless of #1 or #2 above.
>

Oh and

#4. Sean Dague needs to come back from leadership training camp in 
Michigan and make these kind of API decisions for us.

-- 

Thanks,

Matt Riedemann