Types in details structs are different

[joek]

Hi,
as you might have ssen I opend a pull request, which was not done so far. #35

What I like to know is, which direction should we go. Should all the *Details Structs have a RawParameteres field, should the PrivisionDetails struct be changed back to a map type Parameters field or should everything stay as it is ;-)

Cheers
Johannes

[cf-gitbot]

We have created an issue in Pivotal Tracker to manage this. Unfortunately, the Pivotal Tracker project is private so you may be unable to view the contents of the story.

The labels on this github issue will be updated when the story is started.

[avade]

Thanks for raising the @joek.

The team are going to discuss this soon and we will get back to you with an answer!

[Samze]

Hey @joek Thanks for submitting the PR.

You covered three changes in #35. Would you mind submitting three separate PRs for each? It's just a bit cleaner.

1. Regarding the RawParameters inconsistency, we agree that it would be best if the BindDetails/UpdateDetails had a RawParameters field with type json.RawMessage.
2. With regards to the new errors you introduced in Some cleanup #35, what's the point of having them if the broker api code doesn't check for them (i.e. https://github.com/pivotal-cf/brokerapi/blob/master/api.go#L102 for update and https://github.com/pivotal-cf/brokerapi/blob/master/api.go#L255 for bind)? What do you think these errors should translate to in HTTP codes? It does not seem that the broker spec accounts for them at the moment.
3. Your changes regarding LastOperationState in LastOperationResponse look good.

And yes, please run (and fix) the tests. 😻

-- @Samze & @st3v

[joek]

@Samze thanks for your response. I will send pull requests as soon as I cleaned up my messy changes and added testing ;-)