16:00:46 #startmeeting api sig 16:00:47 Meeting started Thu Jul 5 16:00:46 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is elmiko. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:48 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:50 The meeting name has been set to 'api_sig' 16:00:53 #chair cdent elmiko edleafe dtantsur 16:00:53 Current chairs: cdent dtantsur edleafe elmiko 16:01:01 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/API-SIG#Agenda 16:01:09 #topic previous meeting action items 16:01:15 #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/api_sig/2018/ 16:01:31 looks like no actions last week 16:01:32 o/ 16:01:42 #topic open mic and ongoing or new biz 16:01:51 so, anything new to discuss? 16:01:53 \o 16:02:32 do we want to discuss the earlier placement 400 x 404 with path fragment constraints issue (in a more generic sense, given that isn't resolved)? 16:02:56 that isn't ringing a bell for me, more context? 16:03:19 the gist is: if /foo/{uuid} is passed a non-uuid for {uuid} is that a 404 or a 400? 16:03:38 ooh, good question 16:04:00 My position was it was dependent on the definitions 16:04:01 my gut reaction is 404, but i could totally see the argument for 400 16:04:14 If it was specified that that part must be a UUID, then 400 16:04:14 I'd vote for 404 in case the restriction on it being UUID is ever lifted 16:04:18 Otherwise, 404 16:04:25 we did it in ironic actually 16:04:27 also, i think it depends how much you view the URI as API 16:04:34 the complicating factor here is we are talking about a PUT here 16:04:43 where the PUT can be a create 16:04:55 ohhhhmmmmm 16:05:02 interesting 16:05:06 I think this particular case is 400 indeed 16:05:23 we're trying to create a resource from invalid information 16:05:31 yeah, i would agree. in this _specific_ case, 400 with a good error response seems appropriate 16:05:35 Well, if I did a PUT /people/cdunt, I would expect the system to not know that I meant 'cdent', and blindly create it 16:05:52 if you can create /people/cdunt - yes 16:06:19 if you can only create /people/ ... I guess it's weird for a creation to return 404, right? 16:06:33 yeah, this example is funny 16:06:56 sweet corner case though! 16:07:01 dtantsur: yeah, it's gotta be a 400 in that case 16:07:10 "yeah, this example if funny" is exactly right 16:07:14 is! 16:07:16 sigh 16:07:21 sounds like we have some consensus about 400 then, does that help cdent ? 16:07:59 it does. it's what was already in place, but it wasn't interesting enough when it was initially raised that it's a bit like a warming up exercise here 16:08:14 haha, yes! 16:08:31 so, if the current impl is 400, how does the error code look? 16:10:46 this is brand new today, haven't looked at it closely as I had other concerns with the surrounding code 16:10:55 cool 16:11:02 any other topics for open biz? 16:11:26 not from me 16:12:06 #topic guidelines 16:12:09 nope 16:12:13 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/api-wg,n,z 16:12:20 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/api-sig,n,z 16:12:37 I made the requested changes on my two proposals 16:12:49 i reviewed one, but not the other. i'll get on that 16:12:53 ditto 16:13:05 should we freeze this one? 16:13:08 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/577118/ 16:13:14 does it need the freeze process? 16:13:32 i guess it does since it's an addition 16:13:54 yep 16:14:14 Shall I? 16:14:26 indeed =) 16:14:34 goferit 16:15:44 done. Sending out the liaison notices now 16:15:58 thanks edleafe 16:17:07 Hmmm 16:17:07 error: could not add Nikolay Starodubtsev: Nikolay Starodubtsev does not identify a registered user or group 16:17:11 error: could not add Fei Long Wang: Fei Long Wang does not identify a registered user or group 16:17:26 Looks like some stale info in the liaison file 16:18:24 cdent: i added a note, but on your other review i agree with the idea of expanding the schema to include underscore 16:18:43 elmiko: i'm glad you agree with me, otherwise I might have to cut you 16:18:49 LOL 16:19:03 should I fix that as part of that change or a different one? 16:19:08 * edleafe hides from cdent 16:19:14 :D 16:19:18 is this the next new trend in software development practices? prison-yard dev? 16:19:36 threat-driven development 16:19:45 i'm ok with either cdent, adding another pr gives us more focus for arguing about hyphens though ;) 16:19:54 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAh--lH0H3U 16:20:58 i like the way this sounds =) 16:21:22 any other comments about guidelines? 16:21:39 the live versions are much better 16:21:56 catch the undertone of physical abuse a bit better 16:22:42 #action cdent to follow up to make a new change about _ being okay in error.cores 16:22:45 #undo 16:22:46 Removing item from minutes: #action cdent to follow up to make a new change about _ being okay in error.cores 16:22:56 #action cdent to follow up to make a new change about _ being okay in error.codes 16:23:02 ++ 16:23:11 #topic bug review 16:23:17 #link https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/project/1039 16:23:18 error.cores == imporssible! 16:23:37 haha 16:23:46 The GraphQL folks are using our storyboard: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2002782 16:23:48 nice to see the graphql story(?) in here 16:24:09 story is the right term, yes 16:24:27 yeah, but the tasks should probably target neutron, not us 16:24:29 are those things on the front page considered stories and the things under it tasks? (trying to learn the jargon here) 16:24:38 cool, thanks cdent 16:24:47 yep, stories consist of tasks 16:24:54 tasks are bound to a project, stories are global 16:25:36 dtantsur: it could be us or neutron, but since the process started with us, and if successful, will extend to other projects, it feels like this is a good place 16:25:45 interesting, so i guess that's the question, do experimental tasks get bound to their /home/ project? 16:26:00 edleafe: a task is where the change lands 16:26:17 so if the task is a change to openstack/neutron, it should be against neutron 16:26:35 otherwise gerrit will get confused (as well as people like me) 16:26:50 now I'm confused 16:27:09 the story is in api-wg, but the tasks for that story are not? 16:28:46 edleafe: stories are global, they are not bound to any project 16:28:57 only tasks are 16:29:12 as I said a week or two ago, it's the whole paradigm change 16:29:54 do we need to do anything here? like, can the tasks be adjusted after they are created? 16:29:57 so the reason those stories show up in the api-wg project is because they have api-wg tasks? 16:31:15 * cdent does a little dance 16:31:33 right 16:32:40 any other new bugs(stories)(?) to talk about? 16:32:51 So we didn't need to convert to SB for the GraphQL people to use SB? 16:33:02 seems like maybe not 16:33:17 neutron has :) well, it's good to have a task for us 16:33:23 like "keep discussing on the meetings" :) 16:33:51 brb 16:35:36 ok, sorry gas workers just showed up. they are digging up my front yard apparently 16:35:42 any other bug topics? 16:35:53 * cdent lights a match 16:35:58 haha, yeah really ;) 16:36:19 i think we've beaten the bug topic into the ground 16:36:20 #topic weekly newsletter 16:36:29 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/api-sig-newsletter 16:36:29 I have volunteered 16:36:31 \o/ 16:36:39 so I'll ping people when I have a version 16:36:42 cool 16:36:55 any parting words that folks want to get in the record? 16:36:57 but it will be a few minutes, I'm going to go sit outside for a few minutes 16:37:06 no hurry 16:37:17 sounds good to me =) 16:37:26 ok, thanks everybody. have a good weekend! 16:37:27 ramparting 16:37:31 imparting 16:37:35 departing 16:37:40 haha 16:37:44 #endmeeting