[Pulp-dev] Revisit: sync modes
jortel at redhat.com
Wed Aug 8 17:54:49 UTC 2018
I'm not convinced that /named/ sync mode is a good approach. I doubt it
will ever be anything besides (additive|mirror) which really boils down
to mirror (or not). Perhaps the reasoning behind a /named/ mode is that
it is potentially more extensible in that the API won't be impacted when
a new mode is needed. The main problem with this approach is that the
mode names are validated and interpreted in multiple places. Adding
another mode will require coordinated changes in both the core and most
plugins. Generally, I'm an advocate of named things like /modes/ and
/policies/ but given the orthogonal nature of the two modes we currently
support _and_ that no /real/ or anticipated use cases for additional
modes are known, I'm not convinced it's a good fit. Are there any /real/
or anticipated use cases I'm missing?
I propose we replace the (str)sync_mode="" with (bool)mirror=False
anywhere stored or passed.
Are there any /real/ or anticipated use cases I'm missing?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pulp-dev