@dhermes Should we work out what the story is supposed to be for resource_names before merging?

@tseaver The system tests are still passing, so I don't think it's necessary to block on that, though we should get it straightened out. (Was there a version bump for this API I wasn't aware of that deprecated the field?)

@dhermes did you try foo -> projects/foo ? (note the plural projects). Apologies if you just had a typo in your original message, but I do hope that was the problem since it's an easy fix :)

This is what I did before (I know because my chat log with @geigerj)

resource_names = ['project/' + project for project in projects]

@waprin Should we allow callers to send other resource types? I checked and only project IDs come through in the system tests.

@dhermes project/ -> projects/?

@geigerj Right that's what @waprin just said (and I confirmed I was holding the gun wrong before)

Docs look like there are some "orgazinations/" thing but I'm not familiar with it tbh, will have to ask around.

@tseaver Let's merge this and continue this discussion elsewhere (like a PR which converts projects to resource_names)

LGTM