[katello-devel] Modelling of environments, products, etc in Katello (related to renaming of environments)

[Bryan Kearney]

On 08/09/2012 09:11 AM, Justin Sherrill wrote:
> On 08/09/2012 09:08 AM, Dmitri Dolguikh wrote:
>> On 09/08/12 01:49 PM, Justin Sherrill wrote:
>>> On 08/09/2012 08:39 AM, Dmitri Dolguikh wrote:
>>>> On 09/08/12 01:20 PM, James Bowes wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 12:34:57PM +0100, Dmitri Dolguikh wrote:
>>>>>> Please see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795928 for
>>>>>> description of an issue with environment renaming.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The immediate problems around environments: using of environment
>>>>>> names and environment ids for identification of environments
>>>>>> interchangeably. Using db ids for environment identification when
>>>>>> not using environment names.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To resolve these:
>>>>>>   - introduce environment uuids
>>>>>>   - update katello/katello cli to use uuids for environment
>>>>>> identification
>>>>>>   - update repository naming to use environment uuids
>>>>>>   - update candlepin (this will include updates to schema, and
>>>>>> resource controller)
>>>>>>
>>>>> -1 to UUIDs, for the same reason as has been discussed wrt pulp
>>>>> repo labels. a url like:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://my-cdn.local/content/dev/rhel-server/i386/
>>>>>
>>>>> is way more useful than:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://my-cdn.local/content/abc123213-23423423-aaa123/rhel-server/i386/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> not to mention, far more handsome!
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd rather see either immutable labels, or supporting renaming labels,
>>>>> too.
>>>> The issue boils down to renaming of environments. If we are to use
>>>> environment names for environment identification, we have to provide
>>>> resolution for urls that are no longer valid (via 301). Doable, but
>>>> additional work.
>>>>
>>>> The idea of labels is interesting, but I don't think it would work
>>>> out in the long-term: it would become stale after a rename or two
>>>>
>>> I would agree with you, except for the fact that in Satellite many
>>> different objects used the idea of a mutable name and an immutable
>>> label (especially for repos).   I don't know that I once heard a
>>> complaint from a customer that they couldn't rename a label or that
>>> it was stale.
>>>
>> I just don't think it's possible to communicate the intent using a
>> short (for the benefit of usability) label, so that the label would
>> stay constant while environment name kept changing.
>>
>> Perhaps renaming of environments is overrated?
>> -d
>
> I don't think its overrated, and regardless i feel that we need to be
> able to rename repositories as well (where you'd hit the same issue). It
> does seem odd, but it worked really well in satellite :)
>
> -Justin

Did folks on the client ever see the repos? If I remember, they were 
always server side.

We could move to a model where the name and id are readable, but the url 
is not:

[Dev-Evironment-Wiked-Product-Kick-Arse-Repo]
name= Dev Evironment Wiked Product Kick Arse Repo
url= /content/919/555/1212/

-- bk