Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • Check Info object
    • version: aligned with the released API version and formatted correctly (per Commonalities)
    • description:
      • contains sufficient in-line API documentation
      • does not use Telco Jargon / abbreviations (non blocking for release if in documentation)
      • contains the section on auth from ICM 0.2.0 CAMARA-API-access-and-user-consent.md (with no link to ISM release in it - apply for next meta-release to API specs Herbert Damker to check with ICM team.
      • avoids the use of the word "customer", unless explicitly explained what is meant. Alternative can be Instead use as applicable API consumer, (application) endEnd-user, API consumer, etc or whatever else is applicable.
      • avoids reference to CSPs in case use of "Telco/operator/CSP", as also Aggregators, etc. may expose the API. Use e.g. API platform Provider or exposure API platform as applicable
      • avoids use of "subscriber". Use Device or End-user (defined as the application user) as applicable
      • avoids using customer: use API consumer or (application) End-user, as applicable
    • presence of the x-camara-commonalities release referenced, e.g. 0.4.0-rc.1 or 0.4.0.
  • Check servers object has the correct version format e.g. v0.xrc1, v1rc1, v0.x or v1.
  • Check security schemes: check presence and format (OIDC) and scope name format.
  • Is there a way to know if an API requires consent request ? No, this is local regulation. It is covered when using the security scheme and the scope rules.
  • In externalDocs: this field is optional, but recommend to point to the CAMARA, repo.
      description: Project documentation at CAMARA
      url: https://github.com/camaraproject/<repo>
  • Shall error cases be explained in in-line documentation ? (info.description) It seems yes as per Commonalities/documentation/API-DocumentationTemplate.md - Deprecate the doc and doc shall be inline in OAS spec. @Rafal to updater in Commonalities

...

  • if you see a release PR that is nearly ready, add a comment as follows: "Please add @release-management_maintainers to this PR once the PR is ready"
  • for final approval use a comment: "LGTM from ReleaseManagement."


ICM review checks:

ICM Review - SimpleEdgeDiscovery - v1.0.0

(from: https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/189#issuecomment-2315026741)

Ref fro examples: https://github.com/camaraproject/SimpleEdgeDiscovery/blob/r1.2/code/API_definitions/simple-edge-discovery.yaml

...

...

...

...

  •  Verify that there is no unexpected leakage of users' personal information, such as API responses containing identifiers or information beyond the API functionality. 

...

Example: OK SimpleEdgeCloud can be used to verify a phone number like NumberVerification does. Please see API misuse Commonalities#259. If Phone-Number is part of the SimpleEdgeCloud request then response tells the API consumer the same as a request to NumberVerification does.

  •  For APIs including a device object, check that Appendix A of the API-Design-Guidelines.md is respected: info.description template for device identification from access token


ICM Review Result:  ✅ OKcreate an ICM review issue template for stable APIs or add these in the RM review issue template ?Example: OK


Release actions

  • Tick task when checked and done.
  • Check if further review by TSC / Commonalities / ICM is needed (e.g. for targeted stable APIs), and leave issue open until those reviews are marked as done and OK in the review issue
  • When all tasks and complementary reviews are completed, close the review issue with a comment on the overall status of the API.

...