I think of a "snapshot" like a VM snapshot or a Windows restore point - an archival copy of a very fluid and non-discrete system at one point in time. By that understanding, the term RepositoryVersion probably fits better.
I acknowledge the other benefits though. -/+0? On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:51 AM, Dennis Kliban <[email protected]> wrote: > The article you link to just says that "a snapshot is the state of a > system at a particular point in time". The point in time can be now or in > the past. > > The current state of a repository's content would be described as the > latest or most recent snapshot of a repository. > > I am not too worried about the pain of doing the refactoring across > multiple repos. > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:20 AM, David Davis <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I have some reservations about using the name Snapshot. Specifically, I >> don’t think the snapshot term is a good fit. As wikipedia says [0], in CS a >> snapshot represents a state of something "in the past.” How would we >> describe the current state of the repository’s content then? I think >> "current version" would make sense but not "current snapshot.” >> >> Also, changing the code in pulpcore and plugins is going to be a pain. >> Especially with the other things we have planned like renaming Importers to >> Remotes. I think this should factor into our decision as well. >> >> [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapshot >> >> >> David >> >> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Austin Macdonald <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> "Snapshot" is a nice way to explain what a RepositoryVersion is, >>> especially in the context of Publications. "Publish a snapshot." I like >>> the idea, and I informally floated it around PulpCon but decided not to >>> propose it because: >>> >>> - Snapshot is a little misleading about the actual data we store. >>> Specifically, since RepositoryVersions are stored as diffs, when a user >>> views the "content in a version", this is calculated. This is a subtle >>> point, and hopefully not user facing at all, but I think snapshot >>> implies a >>> little bit more certainty than we can offer. >>> - A snapshot also implies a slightly different workflow to me. The >>> workflow I expect with snapshots is to change Repositories "willy nilly", >>> and when you are satisfied, you "take" an snapshot. Versions imply the >>> workflow we have, which is that any time the content set of a Repository >>> is >>> changed, a new version is created. >>> >>> However, I think those concerns are minor and are overshadowed by the >>> potential benefits. Also, I see a direct connection to the thread "Plugin >>> relationship to tasks". The name Snapshot/RepositoryVersion is part of the >>> choice of how we portray the changing of content set of a repo. >>> >>> 1. We can "change a repo" which creates a new version. >>> 2. We can "create a new version" which has different content. >>> >>> To me (1) implies "dispatching a task that has the side effect of >>> creating a new repository version. It would lend itself well to the >>> concept of "managing repositories" rather than "managing >>> versions/snapshots". If we choose this way, I think the name Snapshot >>> conceptually makes sense. >>> >>> (2) implies a POST to create a new RepositoryVersion. As explained in >>> the plugin tasks thread, there are some problems with this, but it is >>> similar to the concept of creating a git commit. I think we wouldn't >>> think of "creating a new Snapshot" to change the content. >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Dennis Kliban <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I propose that we rename the RepositoryVersion model in Pulp 3 to >>>> Snapshot. The REST API would also change to use >>>> /api/v3/repositories/<uuid>/snapshot/ >>>> >>>> The Snapshot name is a better description of what a repository version >>>> is and it is also much shorter in length. >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>>> >>>> -Dennis >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
