[Pulp-dev] Pulp 2 plugin release plan
thomasmckay at redhat.com
Tue Jun 19 21:53:55 UTC 2018
Just curious, but I assume that for an async plugin release that would
imply zero changes to the exposed APIs and only fixes to the underlying
As a consumer of pulp, we install pulp-server not individual plugins. If a
plugin changes it's exposed interface (ie. API) then I'd expect a bump on
the primary product version.
Foreman has an interface layer that, if the API changes, may itself require
updates. If API is 100% backward compatible, then there shouldn't be a
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 10:54 AM, Ina Panova <ipanova at redhat.com> wrote:
>> thank you for sending out the summary of our meeting.
>> Just to highlight and check the overall understanding - there will be
>> one repository per Y pulp release which might contain multiple Z and Y
>> plugin version releases.
>> Correct me if i am wrong.
> That is correct.
>> What would be our next steps in terms of collaboration with the build
> My understanding was that Patrick is planning to do some investigation and
> report back on this thread. Please correct me if I am wrong.
>> Ina Panova
>> Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>> go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 8:20 PM, Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com>
>>> Earlier today a few of us met to discuss how we can release new Y
>>> releases of plugins without a Y release of the platform accompanying them.
>>> The initial proposal was to publish a new Y release of a plugin at the
>>> same time as a Z release of platform and other plugins. More concretely, we
>>> were discussing putting pulp-docker-* 3.2.0 packages into the 2.16
>>> repository. This repository currently contains 3.1.3 packages.
>>> Publishing 3.2.0 packages to this repository would completely remove the
>>> 3.1.3 pulp-docker packages. Since 3.1.3 pulp-docker-* packages were only
>>> published to the 2.16 repository, the only 3.1.z package available after a
>>> publish of 3.2.0 would be 3.1.2 in the 2.15 repository. After
>>> identifying this problem, we decided to NOT release pulp-docker-* 3.2.0
>>> with the 2.16.2 z-stream release.
>>> In order to eliminate this problem in the future, we would like to
>>> investigate if it will be possible to compose repositories with new Y
>>> releases of plugins while retaining the previous versions of packages that
>>> were already published to the repository before. If this is possible, we
>>> would try to start composing our Z stream repositories in such a way
>>> starting with 2.17.0 release.
>>> Questions? Thoughts? Ideas?
>>>  https://repos.fedorapeople.org/pulp/pulp/stable/2.16/7Server/x86_64/
>>>  https://repos.fedorapeople.org/pulp/pulp/stable/2.15/7Server/x86_64/
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pulp-dev