[ZBX-3209] API change logs needed Created: 2010 Nov 11  Updated: 2017 May 30  Resolved: 2012 Feb 20

Status: Closed
Project: ZABBIX BUGS AND ISSUES
Component/s: API (A)
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Incident report Priority: Critical
Reporter: nelsonab Assignee: Unassigned
Resolution: Won't fix Votes: 0
Labels: api, documentation
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified


 Description   

The present lack of a change log for API changes is sub-optimal.

Due to the nature of the API changes I suggest using a wiki page documenting these changes on a per version basis. When a new version comes out a new wiki page should be created and the former pages be set to read only. If possible it would be useful to also note the revision number or branch/tag where the change was made.



 Comments   
Comment by richlv [ 2011 Feb 07 ]

all api changes from 1.8 to 2.0 should be documented at http://www.zabbix.com/documentation/2.0/manual/appendix/api/changes_1.8_-_2.0

if you see any missing, please scream and shout

Comment by nelsonab [ 2011 Apr 08 ]

This is a good start, however I think it needs better detail going forward in 2.0. For instance fixing a bug in 2.1 for example may break a work around a 3rd party developer put in place for a bug in 2.0. Without a note saying bug ZBX-xxxx was resolved may lead to some expletives when users start complaining that the 3rd party library is broken.

Comment by richlv [ 2011 Aug 29 ]

to clarify the last comment, does it mean that you would like to see a separate changelog for all api related fixes in each version, or is it about something else ?

Comment by nelsonab [ 2011 Sep 12 ]

I guess what I'm interested in seeing is which revisions/tickets are associated with the various changes. I know this may not always be possible but when that information is available it may help track down new or regression issues. Also some example before/after code snippets may help as well. I think we'll really start to know more when we get to 2.1 and we have a changes sheet for 2.0 to 2.1 to really get a good understanding of how this should work better.

As I said before I think we're off to a good start on this.

Comment by Alexei Vladishev [ 2012 Feb 20 ]

I am closing it. Great suggestion, but it shouldn't be reported as a bug.

Generated at Thu Mar 28 17:45:27 EET 2024 using Jira 9.12.4#9120004-sha1:625303b708afdb767e17cb2838290c41888e9ff0.