+1, This sounds good to me. On 05/11/2017 10:59 AM, Michael Hrivnak wrote: > We had a brainstorm session today to re-evaluate the previously-identified > options, and try to come up with > some new ones. None of the previously-identified options had enough support > to be chosen. See the thread "PyPI > names for Pulp3" for background. > > To re-cap, we are focused on two related questions: > > 1. What python namespace should Pulp use, since we cannot continue to use > "pulp"? > > 2. What PyPI package names should we use? > > I pitched an idea for 1 that everyone on the call liked, which is "pulpcore". > It could alternatively be > "pulp_core", although my pinky finger prefers the former. The group of > roughly 10 people who participated in > the discussion are recommending "pulpcore" for consideration as the python > namespace to replace "pulp". Please > add your feedback to this thread. > > "core" is likable because it implies a plugin architecture. It's similar to > the word "platform" that we've > used extensively, but shorter (which people liked), and perhaps slightly more > descriptive (which people also > liked). Example: > > from pulpcore import streamer > > We discussed renaming what is currently "pulp.platform" to something more > descriptive. "platform" is a word > that's been with us a long time, but it's worth re-considering, especially if > we shift to a similar word such > as "core". "pulpcore.platform" seems awkward. > > A proposal is "pulpcore.apps", since that code is all directly related to the > celery app and django app. > > Python namespaces would include: > > pulpcore.apps > pulpcore.cli > pulpcore.common > pulpcore.plugin > pulpcore.streamer > > For python package names, they would look something like this: > > pip install pulpcore > pip install pulpcore_cli > pip install pulpcore_streamer > pip install pulpcore_common > > Plugins would continue to use their existing namespace and package names, > with whatever variations are > appropriate in Pulp 3. For example: > > import pulp_rpm.plugins > pip install pulp_rpm_plugins > > Thoughts? Those of you who were part of the discussion, please chime in with > any additional points you'd like > to highlight. > > -- > > Michael Hrivnak > > Principal Software Engineer, RHCE > > Red Hat > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
