[Pulp-dev] Namespacing plugins, looking for feedback

Brian Bouterse bbouters at redhat.com
Mon Dec 17 23:14:56 UTC 2018


+1 to namespacing all Master/Detail objects (Remotes, Publishers, etc).
Namespacing will increase consistency w/ the user experience and will avoid
plugin-to-plugin naming collisions. @ttereshc +1 to the url changes and
content summary changes you've described.

I think it would be ideal if the app specified its 'label' attribute on the
PulpPluginAppconfig subclass, e.g here in pulp_file
https://github.com/pulp/pulp_file/blob/24881314372b9c1c505ff687c15238126b261afa/pulp_file/app/__init__.py#L10
Then the Model for, e.g. the FileContent would have the second portion of
the string 'file' as an example and Master/Detail would assemble them.

Is this implementation how you imagined it?




On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 9:29 AM Tatiana Tereshchenko <ttereshc at redhat.com>
wrote:

> Just to clarify, the type field is not used in the endpoint construction,
> so two changes described in the original e-mail are independent.
>
> In my opinion:
>  - it is possible to have type collisions.
>  - it is possible to have the same endpoints (endpoint_name in a viewset).
>
> FWIW, the endpoint collision is not unique to the master/detail models'
> endpoints. A plugin, in theory, can define any endpoint they want.
> Though not preventing collisions it for endpoints related to master/detail
> models makes it easier to create such collision accidentally.
>
> Tanya
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 2:27 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Is it possible (under the current model, without namespacing) to have
>> type collisions in the database for master/detail models? Like what if two
>> plugins define two Contents with the same type or two Remotes with the same
>> type? This kind of leads me to believe we should namespace everything. On
>> the Ansible plugin for example, I started working on a git Remote[0].
>> Luckily I chose "ansible_git" as the type but I could see plugin writers
>> running into problems if they are not so careful.
>>
>> [0]
>> https://github.com/pulp/pulp_ansible/pull/38/files#diff-debb42c875c19140793de39be3696ee3
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 4:41 PM Tatiana Tereshchenko <ttereshc at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> There is an issue [0] of colliding type names in the content summary
>>> which evolved into more general namespacing problem for plugins.
>>>
>>> The suggested changes [1] are:
>>>  1. include plugin name into the content summary
>>>
>>> "content_summary": {
>>>     "pulp_rpm.package": 50,
>>>     "pulp_rpm.errata": 2,
>>>     "pulp_file.file": 5
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> 2. include plugin name into content endpoints
>>> /api/v3/content/file/files/ --> /api/v3/content/pulp_file/files/
>>> /api/v3/content/rpm/packages/ --> /api/v3/content/pulp_rpm/packages/
>>> /api/v3/content/rpm/errata/ --> /api/v3/content/pulp_rpm/errata/
>>> ...
>>>
>>> For the change #1, not only content summary output is changed but the
>>> type itself in the database. If the content type is used somewhere in the
>>> filters, it should be specified in that format: "plugin_name.plugin_type".
>>> Does it makes sense to extend the master model and have a plugin name field
>>> and a type field, instead of putting preformatted string into the type
>>> field?
>>>
>>> For the change #2, endpoints are namespaced only for the content
>>> endpoint and not for other endpoints related to master/detail models, like
>>> remotes, publishers, etc. It's inconsistent, however it makes the most
>>> sense to have it for content endpoints.
>>>
>>> Any concerns or thoughts?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Tanya
>>>
>>> [0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4185#note-8
>>> [1] https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3801
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> 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/20181217/7408ece1/attachment.htm>


More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list