[Pulp-dev] No 'result' field for a Task in Pulp3

Brian Bouterse bbouters at redhat.com
Mon May 8 21:02:29 UTC 2017

Wow we both responded at the same time!

Spawned tasks are a good example of something any task could need, so it is
its own attribute as 'spawned_tasks' here [3]. I like it being its own
attribute versus a field in a result because it's more structured and it's
filterable then easily too.


On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Michael Hrivnak <mhrivnak at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Jeff Ortel <jortel at redhat.com> wrote:
>> The
>> "result" report /could/ provide an indicator of success and a
>> summary/detail of work completed.  These two
>> things seem completely different.  I'm not advocating for a "result",
>> just pointing out the differences.
> Exactly. If tasks had a "result" field, it should contain references to
> whatever the task produced. If we start tracking things like publications
> and repo versions, then it could make sense for the task to contain a
> result field with an appropriate reference to the object(s) it created.
> --
> Michael Hrivnak
> Principal Software Engineer, RHCE
> Red Hat
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20170508/9917237d/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list