[Openstack] Image API v2 Draft 4

Jay Pipes jaypipes at gmail.com
Tue Apr 10 14:47:35 UTC 2012


FWIW, Nova already has this kind of abstraction, with views and 
serializers... I wasn't planning on reinventing any wheels with the 2.0 
Images API implementation; just using what Nova had (and hopefully 
moving it to openstack-common before bringing the code into Glance).

Best,
-jay

On 04/10/2012 06:51 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Justin Santa Barbara
> <justin at fathomdb.com <mailto:justin at fathomdb.com>> wrote:
>
>             When you're designing JSON considering only JSON, you'd
>             probably use {
>
>             key1: value1 } - as you have done.  If you're designing
>             generically,
>             you'd probably use { key: key1, value: value1 }.
>
>
>         You mean we'd have to do dumb crap because XML doesn't have the
>         native concept of a list? ;)
>
>
>     XML has lists, as does Avro, ProtocolBuffers & Thrift.  XML supports
>     extensible lists, which is why the syntax is different.
>
>             You'd *think* this would work. In practice, however, it
>             really doesn't. Neither does (good, valid) code generation...
>
>
>     Of course it works!  Every JAX-RS webserver does this.  You just
>     can't start with JSON first and expect everything to magically be OK.
>
>     If you think it doesn't work, can you provide an example?
>
>     You start with an abstract model, and then check what it looks like
>     in JSON, in XML, in ProtocolBuffers, in Avro, in Thrift, in HPSTR,
>     etc...  If you start with JSON, then of course it won't work.  If
>     we're going to treat XML as an afterthought, then I'd rather we just
>     didn't support XML at all (and yes, I absolutely mean that - it is
>     good that Glance is honest that they don't support XML.)
>
>
> Kevin Dangoor and Christophe de Vienne have done some work on
> abstracting the view of data inside and outside of the API with
> TGWebServices [1] (a TurboGears add-on) and the more recent "Web
> Services Made Easy" [2], which is framework agnostic. I have used TGWS
> in the past to create an API using SOAP and JSON (it also supports
> generic XML, but we didn't need that). I found that it worked well for
> our purposes at the time.
>
> [1] http://code.google.com/p/tgws/
> [2] http://packages.python.org/WSME/




More information about the Openstack mailing list