On Nov 13, 2014, at 10:21 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: Hi, atm the device registration (unfortunately?) returns the object (installation). However, (fortunately?) this is not really documented: http://aerogear.org/docs/specs/aerogear-unifiedpush-rest/registry/device/... <http://aerogear.org/docs/specs/aerogear-unifiedpush-rest/registry/device/... we just say returns 200 :) I'd like to ask, if we should NOT return the entity, and simply return "200" - with "registered/updated"? Another option would be 204, but that's a problematic API change.... since we change the status code. Or should we leave all as is .... not sure ... that's why I am asking

Thanks, Matthias -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ <http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf <http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf <http://twitter.com/mwessendorf>_______________________________________... aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Hi, atm the device registration (unfortunately?) returns the object (installation). However, (fortunately?) this is not really documented: http://aerogear.org/docs/specs/aerogear-unifiedpush-rest/registry/device/... we just say returns 200 :) I'd like to ask, if we should NOT return the entity, and simply return "200" - with "registered/updated"? Another option would be 204, but that's a problematic API change.... since we change the status code. Or should we leave all as is .... not sure ... that's why I am asking Thanks, Matthias -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

_______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev