[Pulp-dev] Does everything live in pulp.app?

Brian Bouterse bbouters at redhat.com
Fri Sep 16 14:36:30 UTC 2016

The 30ish tasks themselves are not yet moved. Those currently are still 
in their existing homes in pulp.server.path.to.a.task. I don't plan to 
move them with my changes.

When we do move the tasks, we may run into import issues at that time, 
but I think we will be able to resolve them. We may want to move them 
into the package pulp.tasking.registry. It would be great to have all of 
our tasks defined in one place.


On 09/16/2016 09:05 AM, Austin Macdonald wrote:
> On 09/15/2016 11:47 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote:
>> <snip>
>> I'm wondering if moving it to pulp.tasks would be a better home? Along
>> with that line of thinking, we would only put code in the Django app
>> which Django uses. Views, Models, Migrations, Settings, Middleware.
>> Things like that.
>> This would cause any number of python packages to live as
>> pulp.<mypackagename> instead of pulp.app.<mypackagename>
> Will the home of tasks affect the import order? Particularly since we
> are also splitting the models out of a single file, I am reminded
> strongly of the circular imports disaster we had in 2.y when workers
> attempted to import their tasks, which each needed different models.
> Tbh, I am having a hard time imagining how the final import trees might
> look, but I am curious if that is something that has been planned.

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list