Gotcha. /me shrugs However we decide to implement this, its pretty evident that this field will eventually be a core field, or at the very least treated like a core field. So I can confidently say that yes, it should be renamed.
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:06 AM Daniel Alley <dal...@redhat.com> wrote: > The serializer just needs to remove the _artifacts field and add an >> _artifact field. Here's how I did it in docker, which is a total ripoff of >> the file plugin. >> > > I know it's fairly simple to do manually, I just meant to do so > automatically (unless we also need a serializer mixin like you said). > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:41 AM Austin Macdonald <amacd...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> The serializer just needs to remove the _artifacts field and add an >> _artifact field. Here's how I did it in docker, which is a total ripoff of >> the file plugin. >> >> https://github.com/pulp/pulp_docker/pull/291/ >> >> It might be worth making a serializer mixin also? (I can almost hear >> jortel cringing about all these mixins) >> >> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:32 AM Daniel Alley <dal...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> Given that single-artifact Content is likely to be a very common pattern >>>> among plugins, maybe it would be best to add this as a mixin for pulpcore. >>>> If that's the future of this field, we should definitely make it _artifact. >>> >>> >>> +1 to this, I don't much like having to redefine this in every plugin. >>> I'm curious about how to make it work with the serializers though. >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:13 AM Austin Macdonald <amacd...@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> We have single-artifact Content in Docker as well. I've gone ahead and >>>> named the field _artifact. >>>> >>>> Given that single-artifact Content is likely to be a very common >>>> pattern among plugins, maybe it would be best to add this as a mixin for >>>> pulpcore. If that's the future of this field, we should definitely make it >>>> _artifact. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 12:24 PM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In most plugins, Content only has a single artifact so we created a >>>>> virtual field 'artifact' that we expose to end users. In a recent >>>>> change[0], we prefixed the Content fields with underscores ('_') so we're >>>>> considering renaming the field to '_artifact' to be consistent with other >>>>> plugins that have '_artifacts' on Content. We could use some feedback by >>>>> sprint planning (Jan 4) either here or on the issue: >>>>> >>>>> https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4282 >>>>> >>>>> [0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4206 >>>>> >>>>> David >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>> >>>
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
