Feature #725

Feature Request - Web Service Gateway

Added by Doug Raney about 1 year ago. Updated about 1 year ago.

Status:Resolved Start:2008-02-22
Priority:Low Due date:
Assigned to:- % Done:

0%

Category:-
Target version:-
Resolution:


Description

I would like to suggest that Redmine include an XML interface for submitting new issues. I would like to program automatic feedback in my applications to create new issues in Redmine when unknown or bad exceptions occur. I see value in this feature because it allows integration with Redmine and it also allows my applications to proactively create issues when something goes wrong. It seems better than trusting 100% of problems to be reported by end users.

I was thinking of some kind of SOAP compliant interface that provides operations to interact with Redmine.

I'm not interested in being notified of an exception. There are lots of ways to do that without Redmine. I am interested in creating issues based on exceptions. It would be a great way to help our team be proactive about issues.

Someone suggested adding REST to Redmine. I dont know much about REST but it looks like it could work. I would prefer that the Redmine folks implement as apart of the project, as I'm sure they would have better ideas about how to implement. I think it should be something everyone can enjoy and not just my own custom hack.


Related issues

duplicates Feature #296 REST API Assigned

History

Updated by chris mcharg about 1 year ago

+1 for a REST api

Updated by Martin Herr about 1 year ago

+1 for REST api :)

Updated by satoko hibi about 1 year ago

+1 for REST api.
Should meet the needs of the times.

Updated by Thomas Lecavelier about 1 year ago

  • Status changed from New to Resolved

Clone of #269, mark this as resolved, waiting for #269 implementation.

Updated by Doug Raney about 1 year ago

This doesnt seem to be related to #269 at all. Or am I missing something. I believe this issue should be reopened.

Updated by Doug Raney about 1 year ago

I see that Thomas Lecavelier intended to say it was a clone of #296 and not #269.

Also available in: Atom PDF