-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 342
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix: small api fixes #4627
fix: small api fixes #4627
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In reference to #4617:
- Was point 1 addressed? I don't think I see some change here which would address it
- Seems that all the other points (2 through 6) have been addressed
- Has there been any discussion already about points 2 and 6? I don't know if changing those might have some sort of unintended side effects?
- Point 2: Has there been any discussion about renaming
peer
? We had some uncertainty on that one. - Point 6: Has there been any discussion about changing the neighborhoodSize to be inclusive of all nodes in the neighborhood?
- Point 2: Has there been any discussion about renaming
openapi/SwarmCommon.yaml
Outdated
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ | |||
openapi: 3.0.3 | |||
info: | |||
version: 3.2.7 | |||
version: 3.2.8 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The API has breaking changes (renaming two fields) and the version is only updating the bugfix number. To be semantically correct, API number should be raised to 4, or to keep old fields for backward compatibility. It depends on the expectations for the API stability, but since the major version is not 0, the API supposed to be stable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The changes are ok, it is just a question are backward compatibility changes are needed or the API can be incompatible at these two fields.
Let's leave this breaking change and update the API version then. wdyt @NoahMaizels ? |
Yeah I agree with you, I think it can be included in the next release since like you said it will be including breaking changes as well and we already have plans to communicate about those in advance |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks
This reverts commit b91fb4a.
Description
Small api fixes
closes #4617