On 03/20/2018 09:47 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote:
I think the change would be positive in several ways. Snapshot is a
more familiar term that we can give content on what that means in Pulp
(content not settings). I think this will make Pulp more approachable.
It also aligns with the language aptly uses which I see as a good
thing for clarity in our similar software space. They define a
snapshot as a "immutable list of packages".
https://www.aptly.info/doc/overview/
This also solves the inconsistent naming problem between
RepositoryVersion and RepoVersion. We try to enforce a standard but
people still shorten it because the name is just so long. Renaming it
to snapshot would resolve this.
It would be painful, but a fancy IDE can do most of the renaming
automatically.
So a +1 from me.
+1
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:20 AM, David Davis <[email protected]
<mailto:[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
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapshot>
David
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Austin Macdonald
<[email protected] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
<https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>
_______________________________________________
Pulp-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
<https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev>
_______________________________________________
Pulp-dev mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
<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
