API Design Questions (3)

[Gervase Markham]

On 24/09/09 11:55, Max Kanat-Alexander wrote:
> On 09/24/2009 03:44 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
>> Fields in Bugzilla bugs have varying levels of optionalness, from custom
>> fields, which of course are never guaranteed to be present because they
>> are product-specific,
>
> 	No, actually, custom fields are always present. The product-specific
> bit (which exists only in 3.4) is all done via JS in the UI.

So what happens if someone tries to set a custom field on a bug which is 
in a product which it's not enabled for, a) via the UI and b) via the 
Web Services interface?

>> B) provide them, but with a "" or [] value
>
> 	I'm in favor of this since it makes it easier for clients.

This is hard to implement right now for custom fields, because the 
legacy XML interface, which I am using under the covers because it 
returns more data than the XML-RPC one, doesn't return them unless they 
are set. We could fix that, of course.

But in general, I will try and go with principle B.

Gerv

_______________________________________________
dev-apps-bugzilla mailing list
dev-apps-bugzilla at lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-bugzilla