PATCH semantics do not meet RFC standards

[Amit Gandhi]

Currently the PATCH semantics do not meet the standards for PATCH as used by Glance Images, and described below in the Openstack ML thread:

http://openstack.10931.n7.nabble.com/api-Usage-of-the-PATCH-verb-td60101.html

We want to conform to the following recommendations:
[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5789
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6902
[3] http://williamdurand.fr/2014/02/14/please-do-not-patch-like-an-idiot/

2.1. A Simple PATCH Example

   PATCH /file.txt HTTP/1.1
   Host: www.example.com
   Content-Type: application/example
   If-Match: "e0023aa4e"
   Content-Length: 100

[
{ "op": "test", "path": "/a/b/c", "value": "foo" },
{ "op": "remove", "path": "/a/b/c" },
{ "op": "add", "path": "/a/b/c", "value": [ "foo", "bar" ] },
{ "op": "replace", "path": "/a/b/c", "value": 42 },
{ "op": "move", "from": "/a/b/c", "path": "/a/b/d" },
{ "op": "copy", "from": "/a/b/d", "path": "/a/b/e" }
]

This can be implemented using JSONPatch in python.

[Amit Gandhi (amit-gandhi)]

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144993/

[OpenStack Infra (hudson-openstack)]

Reviewed: https://review.openstack.org/144993
Committed: https://git.openstack.org/cgit/stackforge/poppy/commit/?id=e2a630235c1f3f3812491957231d8ff43191d153
Submitter: Jenkins
Branch: master

commit e2a630235c1f3f3812491957231d8ff43191d153
Author: Obulpathi <email address hidden>
Date: Mon Jan 5 09:36:25 2015 -0500

    Implements PATCH using RFC semantics

    Change-Id: If77b5240317e484a6082e3a60036bd5fb2f6a458
    Closes-Bug: 1406403
    Closes-Bug: 1407287