update-design-doc-with-explicit-sub-scope-changes #177
Conversation
shilpa-padgaonkar
requested review from
rartych,
patrice-conil,
RubenBG7 and
PedroDiez
as code owners
|
Changed PR to draft based on subscription related discussion. Also need to await feedback & consensus on #184 |
|
@bigludo7 and @PedroDiez : Would be great if you could kindly review the scope related changes for explicit subscriptions documented in the design guidelines and recommend changes if needed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Look good for me @shilpa-padgaonkar . I've just 3 comments for your appreciation (not blocking) and one word to correct. Thanks.
| @@ -1332,6 +1354,8 @@ Note: It is perfectly valid for a CAMARA API to have several event types managed | |||
|
|
|||
| In order to ease developer adoption, the pattern for Resource-based event subscription should be consistent for all API providing this feature. | |||
|
|
|||
| To ensure consistency across Camara subprojects, it is necessary that explicit subscriptions are handled within separate API/s. It is recommended when possible to append the keyyword "subscriptions" at the end of the API name. For e.g. device-roaming-subscriptions.yaml | |||
To makes changes for #189 (review)
Co-authored-by: Pedro Díez García <[email protected]>
|
@PedroDiez and @bigludo7 have already approved the PR, but I would need a codeowner approval to be able to merge this. @rartych is on vacation. Could either @patrice-conil or @RubenBG7 kindly approve the PR? |
|
@shilpa-padgaonkar my colleague Patrice is also enjoying well-deserved vacation :) |
|
Done @shilpa-padgaonkar |
What type of PR is this?
Add one of the following kinds:
What this PR does / why we need it:
Explicit subscriptions need to be transparent about the event types that they offer.
Following changes are included:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #163
Special notes for reviewers:
Changelog input
Additional documentation
This section can be blank.