{"action":"closed","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/emberjs/data/issues/3186","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/emberjs/data/issues/3186/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/emberjs/data/issues/3186/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/emberjs/data/issues/3186/events","html_url":"https://github.com/emberjs/data/issues/3186","id":84819252,"number":3186,"title":"Consider refactoring the attrs hash for 1.0","user":{"login":"igorT","id":715175,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/715175?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT","html_url":"https://github.com/igorT","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/igorT/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/emberjs/data/labels/Review%20for%201.0","name":"Review for 1.0","color":"006b75"}],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":2,"created_at":"2015-06-03T23:36:21Z","updated_at":"2015-06-12T16:09:42Z","closed_at":"2015-06-12T16:09:42Z","body":"Serializers are currently customized using the `attrs` hash\r\nFor example: http://emberjs.com/api/data/classes/DS.RESTSerializer.html#property_attr\r\nHowever the `attrs` hash grew out organically and applies to both relationships and attributes. The attrs name can be confusing, should we change it to options or smth? "}}