[openstack-tc] recommendation to deprecate XML in new major API versions
markmc at redhat.com
Tue Jan 21 16:05:43 UTC 2014
On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 10:53 -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com>
> On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 09:29 -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > I would like to see an affirmative statement from the TC
> like "We are
> > planning to start dropping XML support in APIs during Juno
> in order to
> > focus our limited development resources" (or a later
> release, or "we are
> > going to keep doing XML whether we like it or not") posted
> to the mailing
> > list for feedback, rather than the open-ended "what do you
> want" questions
> > we've been posing.
> I'm generally against us closing doors and saying "we never
> want XML
> support, no matter how much work you're willing to do on it".
> A ban on
> XML or a "JSON is the one true representation" statement isn't
> we're trying to achieve.
> I think we can be clear about the level of support we can sustain
> without being draconian. My point was just that we should always
> expect someone to say "yes, please keep XML support" if we ask it as a
> question. At the same time, saying directly that we don't
> require projects to support XML is not the same as forbidding its use.
> Our choice of phrasing will be important.
3) Be explicit that (new and existing) projects (or even new versions
of their APIs are (so far) only required to support a JSON
> We want:
> 1) Clear guidance to users that XML support is known to be
> very week
> and, due to lack of interest in developing and
> maintaining it, XML
> support could get worse in future releases. I'm thinking
> support off by default, warnings in documentation,
> notices in
> release notes, etc.
> 2) An understanding that because of the lack of active
> maintenance of
> XML support, authors of new features can choose to
> regress XML
> support. Semi-working XML support can't be allowed to
> hold up
> Is a semi-working API useful enough to even ship turned off by
Fair point - maybe "working enough to be useful to some, even if not
perfect" is a better way of putting it.
Projects are free to remove any features that have decayed beyond
usefulness because of lack of interest.
More information about the OpenStack-TC