Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ListObjectsV should be named ListObjectsV2 #447

Closed
joehealy opened this issue Feb 1, 2018 · 4 comments
Closed

ListObjectsV should be named ListObjectsV2 #447

joehealy opened this issue Feb 1, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

@joehealy
Copy link

joehealy commented Feb 1, 2018

Is there a reason ListObjectsV2 is named ListObjectsV?

It is unclear that this is the right one to be using as the documentation talks about ListObjectsV2 being the revised and recommended API.

See first paragraph at: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/amazonka-s3-1.5.0/docs/Network-AWS-S3-ListObjectsV.html

If there is a good technical reason for it being different, it might be worth highlighting that at some place in the docs.

@rcook
Copy link
Contributor

rcook commented Feb 25, 2018

I suspect that this is a bug in the code generator as opposed to an intentional behaviour.

@rcook
Copy link
Contributor

rcook commented Feb 26, 2018

I've found the function that causes this: renameOperation at https://github.com/brendanhay/amazonka/blob/develop/gen/src/Gen/Text.hs#L56. This function strips all digits from operation names (except for the 3 in S3, which is special-cased). The fix is to modify this function to treat version suffixes such as V3 differently too. I'll see if I can put together a fix and pull request for this.

rcook added a commit to rcook/amazonka that referenced this issue Feb 26, 2018
This allows "ListObjectsV2" to be rendered correctly.
rcook added a commit to rcook/amazonka that referenced this issue Feb 26, 2018
This allows "ListObjectsV2" to be rendered correctly.
rcook added a commit to rcook/amazonka that referenced this issue Feb 26, 2018
This allows "ListObjectsV2" to be rendered correctly.
@joehealy
Copy link
Author

That would certainly be great. I imagine this may break some peoples code, but it should be an easy fix and I suspect they would have raised an issue if they had noticed it.

Looking forward to the fix - thanks

@rcook
Copy link
Contributor

rcook commented Mar 15, 2018

@brendanhay: Is this change likely to be accepted?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants