Yes I’d favor leave as is, and at some stage in future convert the error messages to JSON.
On 12 Jan 2015, at 12:22 pm, Barry Warsaw <barry@list.org> wrote:
On Jan 11, 2015, at 06:23 AM, Andrew Stuart wrote:
Happy to do so if you like. Would you mind pointing me in the direction of some instructions for filing bugs please?
FWIW I’d probably favor a REST API that is behaving improperly by returning plain text error responses (i.e. the current situation) rather than a REST API that returns application/json content type for valid responses and text/plain for errors. Once that gets baked into release 1 it’ll be challenging to correct back to application/json later because people will write clients to expect text/plain for errors.
It’s a whole lot easier conceptually to deal with a REST API that always returns the same content-type regardless of the outcome of the API call.
Some REST tools don’t have any mechanism for defining mixed response type APIs which leads to some weird outcomes when querying successfully versus getting errors. In short, I’d leave as-is and eventually turn the error text into json, but obviously Barry you should say what you want.
I think at least the Content-Type should be accurate.
Your response sounds a little contradictory, but let me see if I can summarize it. From a practicality view point, you prefer the current implementation, even if it isn't conceptually pure, at least for now.
That works for me because then I don't have to worry about changing anything. :) I'm open to re-evaluating that in some future Mailman release.
Cheers, -Barry
Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/andrew.stuart%40s...
Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9