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

[Brian Bouterse]

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.

[3]:
https://github.com/pulp/pulp/blob/b86677f069c03643380d98bc51cd1291fdfa3289/platform/pulp/app/models/task.py#L157

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>