I always understood the "lifting the uniqueness" as allowing to have the same name used for different resource types. So the new natrual_key (aka unique_together) would be ["name", "type"].
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 2:55 PM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Agreed. > > David > > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 8:42 AM Grant Gainey <ggai...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 8:14 AM Dennis Kliban <dkli...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>> Does anyone else have an opinion? If not, I am going to start by writing a >>> task to remove this name uniqueness constraint for repositories. >> >> >> Import/export relies on non-pulp_id-uniqueness to identify Things. I was >> assuming we were talking about adding pulp_type to the Repository >> uniqueness-constraint, so that a given name/type would be unique (which >> would require a single change to RepositoryResource) >> >> If we're talking about just removing the uniqueness-constraint altogether, >> then life gets a lot harder. >> >> G >> -- >> Grant Gainey >> Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat System Management Engineering >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
