[Pulp-dev] Importer and Distributor Modeling

Jeremy Cline jcline at redhat.com
Thu Sep 8 17:35:29 UTC 2016

On 09/08/2016 12:41 PM, Jeff Ortel wrote:
> +1 to the proposal pending:
> 1. a more solid plan to provide for what the pulp2 group distributor is doing wrt group publishing with a
> single configuration.

My proposal is that we *don't* add a special way to do this unless
there is a very, very good reason (and I don't think there is right
now). Currently, this workflow has lots of oddities around it, like
filtering out repositories in the group that aren't of the type a
distributor can handle.

Why not just let the client handle looping through a repository group
and publishing/syncing/deleting each repository? If the client wants a
unified configuration, why not have them copy the repositories they
want in the group and configure them all the same way?

> 2. let's keep the importer FK to repository required for now.  That way we don't create the possibility of
> orphaned importers until we re-implement alternate content sources.  It's an easy migration later to just make
> the FK not-null.

One thing to keep in mind is currently the importer has a natural key
based on the repository. I believe dropping the non-null requirement on
the repository FK will break this. Do we want to bite that bullet later?

Jeremy Cline
XMPP: jeremy at jcline.org
IRC:  jcline

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20160908/246105bd/attachment.sig>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list