openstack-poc team mailing list archive

[Ewan Mellor <Ewan.Mellor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypipes@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:28 AM
> To: Paul Voccio
> Cc: Ewan Mellor; openstack-poc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Openstack-poc] API compatibility
> 
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Paul Voccio
> <openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Wouldn't this mean that versions of the API for projects would then
> have a
> > version that is reflective of the release and not a spec number?
>  Version
> > 1.1 doesn't mean anything in Diablo if it doesn't adhere to the 1.1
> guide?
> >  The api would be versioned for diablo and we would start a new
> version for
> > essex?
> 
> Perhaps I wasn't specific enough... sorry about that.
> 
> I mean that we guarantee that whatever latest version of an API a
> project supports for a release, clients that communicate on that API
> can be assured that the servers built in the next release series will
> at a minimum support that API version, along with any new API versions
> that might have been added in the new release series.
> 
> For instance, if Compute API 1.1 is what is supported in the Diablo
> release series for Nova, then we make the guarantee that all the
> server code in the Essex release series supports the 1.1 API, even if
> during the Essex release series, a new Compute 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 API
> comes out.

Yes, that's what I meant.  Thanks Jay.

I would also add that if we claim that Diablo implements OpenStack API 1.1, and there's a doc that calls itself OpenStack API 1.1, then if those two things don't match by the time we ship we don't deserve to call ourselves professionals and we should all go home.

I'm not going to get into arguments about designing the API up front vs driving the API from the capabilities of the platform.  I don't care why the two things are skewed at the moment.  However, they absolutely 100% have to be lined up by the time Diablo is released.

Ewan.