Code review comment for lp:~jaypipes/glance/parallax-register-image

On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Jay Pipes <email address hidden> wrote:

> > 101: i assume you meant to remove support for GET /images/detail.
>
> Yes, that does not comply with the Atom publishing protocol. No need for
> it AFAICT.
>

We need it in order to comply as much as possible with the current Rackspace
API. GET /images should just return id and name, while /images/detail
returns all other available data. (same for GET /images/4 and GET
/images/4/detail .)

I think our goal was to conform to the RS API, not to conform to the Atom
protocol. Then again, we're planning to iterate on the API shortly after
Austin, so I'm not positive what this buys us.

cc'ing a couple of people from whom I've heard the "conform to the RS API"
message, to get their second opinions.

Michael