[FC-0118] docs: explicitly mention API versioning for backwards incompatible change - #38188
Merged
Faraz32123 merged 1 commit intoMar 18, 2026
Conversation
Faraz32123
requested review from
Abdul-Muqadim-Arbisoft,
feanil,
robrap and
taimoor-ahmed-1
March 18, 2026 12:29
Faraz32123
changed the title
Faraz32123
changed the title
feanil
approved these changes
Mar 18, 2026
robrap
reviewed
Mar 18, 2026
| * Use serializers for both input validation and output formatting. | ||
| * Ensure serializers are properly documented with field descriptions and validation rules. | ||
| * Maintain backward compatibility for all APIs during migration. | ||
| * Maintain backward compatibility for all APIs during migration. While the goal is fully compatible DRF serializers, if that is not possible and we must make a backwards incompatible change, that change MUST be handled by creating a new version of the API and transitioning to that API using the deprecation process. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change looks good.
I'm still curious about the line that triggered the discussion:
- https://github.com/openedx/openedx-platform/blame/3bff411f645140d70626badb1172dcdaa631068a/docs/decisions/0025-standardize-serializer-usage.rst#L92
- This line begins with "May require updates...", and seems to imply backward-incompatibility.
- I'm not clear if it is saying:
- Clients may need to be updated if they care about a formatting change that we somehow consideri minor and backward-compatible (which would be odd)? Or,
- Under rare circumstances, this may require backward-incompatible format changes, and clients would need to be moved to a newer version? (This is closer to the statement you update in this PR, but clarifies that we think this will be rare, but possible.) Or,
- Is this trying to say something else?
Thanks.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Under rare circumstances, this may require backward-incompatible format changes, and clients would need to be moved to a newer version? (This is closer to the statement you update in this PR, but clarifies that we think this will be rare, but possible.)
Yes, this will be rare but possible and transitioning will be done using deprecation process,
Users who have done customizations on top of openedx & are using these APIs somewhere would need to move to newer version if there's some major(rare but possible as the goal is make fully compatible DRF serializers) change in response format.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How would you feel about clarifying the line I indicated with something like:
* Rare backward incompatibilities may require updates to existing client code that expect legacy formats.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Faraz32123 @feanil: I see this merged already, so I just created a PR: #38193.
Faraz32123
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 1, 2026
…ble change (#38188) Co-authored-by: Muhammad Faraz Maqsood <faraz.maqsood@A006-01130.local>
Faraz32123
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2026
…ble change (#38188) Co-authored-by: Muhammad Faraz Maqsood <faraz.maqsood@A006-01130.local>
Faraz32123
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 24, 2026
…ble change (#38188) Co-authored-by: Muhammad Faraz Maqsood <faraz.maqsood@A006-01130.local>
Faraz32123
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 24, 2026
* docs: add ADR for standardizing serializer usage (#38139) * docs: explicitly mention API versioning incase of backwards incompatible change (#38188) Co-authored-by: Muhammad Faraz Maqsood <faraz.maqsood@A006-01130.local> * docs: add ADR for standardizing permissions usage (#38187) Currently, authorization logic is implemented inconsistently across views, serializers, and custom access checks. This ADR will define a consistent approach using DRF permission classes, object-level permissions, and queryset scoping where appropriate. Co-authored-by: Taimoor Ahmed <taimoor.ahmed@A006-01711.local> * docs: minor change in ADR language * fix: add s back * docs: migrate restful & legacy django api endpoints to standard drf viewsets (#38191) * docs: Add ADR for ensuring GET requests are idempotent Add edx-platform/docs/decisions/0030-ensure-get-requests-are-idempotent.rst as an accepted ADR. Define policy that GET endpoints must be strictly read-only, with side effects moved to explicit write endpoints or async event pipelines. Include edx-platform relevance, anti-pattern vs preferred code examples, and rollout guidance for testing and migration. * docs: add ADR for standardizing API documentation and schema coverage - Propose adoption of drf-spectacular across Open edX services - Require @extend_schema decorators for all API endpoints - Document request/response schemas, status codes, and error conditions * docs: remove incorrect ADR number * docs: address api-doc-tools deprecation in ADR per review feedback - Add context explaining what api-doc-tools is and its relationship to drf-yasg - Document deprecation and archival of api-doc-tools as a consequence - Add migration guide mapping api-doc-tools decorators and URL helpers to their drf-spectacular equivalents - Add rejected alternative for updating api-doc-tools internals - Add rollout step for final archival cutover Closes review comment by @feanil * docs: expand ADR-0027 with api-doc-tools deprecation and drf-yasg incompatibility analysis Address review feedback on FC-0118 ADR 0027: - Add context paragraph explaining what api-doc-tools is (drf-yasg shim, decorators it provides, schema view, OpenAPI 2.0 output) - Document deprecation of api-doc-tools and drf-yasg as a consequence, including transition-window behavior - Add detailed 8-point incompatibility analysis explaining why drf-yasg cannot be replaced with drf-spectacular inside api-doc-tools (recorded in the ADR itself for future reference) - Add migration plan for existing api-doc-tools consumers with concrete decorator/import/setting mapping - Update Rollout Plan to track api-doc-tools removal - Add references to drf-spectacular migration guide, drf-yasg upstream status, and api-doc-tools repository * chore: fix edx-mantained to edX-platform * docs: add ADR for standardizing pagination across APIs (#38300) * docs: add ADR for api versioning strategy (#38304) * docs: add ADR for standardizing filtering/sorting parameters (#38303) * docs: add ADR-0029 standardized error responses decision (#38246) * docs: add ADR for merging similar endpoints (#38262) * docs: ADR for normalizing nested json apis (#38305) * docs: add separate example for input & output serializers * docs: ADR for documenting and consolidating internal MFE APIs (#38309) * docs: ADR for documenting and consolidating internal MFE APIs Define a plan to document all undocumented internal LMS APIs consumed by MFEs into stable, OpenAPI-described contracts. Introduces a consolidated config endpoint pattern with optional course/user context, authentication boundaries, and a rollout plan following OEP-21 DEPR process. * docs: add ADR for canonical MFE configuration endpoint Record that /api/frontend_site_config/v1/ is the canonical endpoint for MFE/front-end runtime configuration (frontend-base SiteConfig, OEP-65) and that /api/mfe_config/v1 is legacy, on the DEPR path tracked in #37255 and added, and that user-context data (roles, permissions) belongs on resource-oriented endpoints rather than on a configuration payload. Documentation/schema coverage is deferred to the API Documentation & Schema Coverage ADR (#38189). Partially supersedes ADR 0001 (MFE Config API). Part of FC-0118 Open edX REST API standardization (#38137). Refs #38280 * docs: add ADR for standardizing authentication patterns (#38301) * docs: add ADR for standardizing authentication patterns * docs: resolve confusion & update the ADR based on OEP-0042 * docs: support multiple valid auth schemes & deprecate BearerAuthentication * docs: change wording for decisions a bit. * docs: add real examples in accordance with our updated decisions * docs: sync ADR with edx-drf-extensions issue 284 openedx/edx-drf-extensions#284 * docs: make doc more explicit & address comments * docs: move Bearer auth depr plan out of ADR Move BearerAuthentication depr plan out of this doc So that it resides in single place i.e. to its deprecation ticket. * docs: add a pointer file in oauth_dispatch for this ADR * docs: make decision more clear * docs: make authentication_classes usage more clearer * docs: adress the comment related to session authentication * chore: correct file number w.r.t order of the ADRs --------- Co-authored-by: Muhammad Faraz Maqsood <faraz.maqsood@A006-01130.local> Co-authored-by: Taimoor Ahmed <68893403+taimoor-ahmed-1@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Taimoor Ahmed <taimoor.ahmed@A006-01711.local> Co-authored-by: Robert Raposa <rraposa@edx.org> Co-authored-by: Abdul Muqadim <abdul.muqadim@A006-01811.local> Co-authored-by: Abdul Muqadim <abdul.muqadim@192.168.1.7> Co-authored-by: Abdul-Muqadim-Arbisoft <139064778+Abdul-Muqadim-Arbisoft@users.noreply.github.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is an update PR for an ADR to standardize serializer usage.
Related issue: #38138
Related comment: #38139 (comment)