[Pulp-dev] let's rename RepositoryVersion to Snapshot

Daniel Alley dalley at redhat.com
Tue Mar 20 15:08:09 UTC 2018

I think of a "snapshot" like a VM snapshot or a Windows restore point - an
archival copy of a very fluid and non-discrete system at one point in
time.  By that understanding, the term RepositoryVersion probably fits

I acknowledge the other benefits though.  -/+0?

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:51 AM, Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com> wrote:

> The article you link to just says that "a snapshot is the state of a
> system at a particular point in time". The point in time can be now or in
> the past.
> The current state of a repository's content would be described as the
> latest or most recent snapshot of a repository.
> I am not too worried about the pain of doing the refactoring across
> multiple repos.
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:20 AM, David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>> I have some reservations about using the name Snapshot. Specifically, I
>> don’t think the snapshot term is a good fit. As wikipedia says [0], in CS a
>> snapshot represents a state of something "in the past.” How would we
>> describe the current state of the repository’s content then? I think
>> "current version" would make sense but not "current snapshot.”
>> Also, changing the code in pulpcore and plugins is going to be a pain.
>> Especially with the other things we have planned like renaming Importers to
>> Remotes. I think this should factor into our decision as well.
>> [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapshot
>> David
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Austin Macdonald <austin at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>> "Snapshot" is a nice way to explain what a RepositoryVersion is,
>>> especially in the context of Publications. "Publish a snapshot."  I like
>>> the idea, and I informally floated it around PulpCon but decided not to
>>> propose it because:
>>>    - Snapshot is a little misleading about the actual data we store.
>>>    Specifically, since RepositoryVersions are stored as diffs, when a user
>>>    views the "content in a version", this is calculated. This is a subtle
>>>    point, and hopefully not user facing at all, but I think snapshot implies a
>>>    little bit more certainty than we can offer.
>>>    - A snapshot also implies a slightly different workflow to me. The
>>>    workflow I expect with snapshots is to change Repositories "willy nilly",
>>>    and when you are satisfied, you "take" an snapshot. Versions imply the
>>>    workflow we have, which is that any time the content set of a Repository is
>>>    changed, a new version is created.
>>> However, I think those concerns are minor and are overshadowed by the
>>> potential benefits. Also, I see a direct connection to the thread "Plugin
>>> relationship to tasks". The name Snapshot/RepositoryVersion is part of the
>>> choice of how we portray the changing of content set of a repo.
>>>    1. We can "change a repo" which creates a new version.
>>>    2. We can "create a new version" which has different content.
>>> To me (1) implies "dispatching a task that has the side effect of
>>> creating a new repository version. It would lend itself well to the
>>> concept of "managing repositories" rather than "managing
>>> versions/snapshots". If we choose this way, I think the name Snapshot
>>> conceptually makes sense.
>>> (2) implies a POST to create a new RepositoryVersion. As explained in
>>> the plugin tasks thread, there are some problems with this, but it is
>>> similar to the concept of creating a git commit. I think we wouldn't
>>> think of "creating a new Snapshot" to change the content.
>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I propose that we rename the RepositoryVersion model in Pulp 3 to
>>>> Snapshot. The REST API would also change to use
>>>> /api/v3/repositories/<uuid>/snapshot/
>>>> The Snapshot name is a better description of what a repository version
>>>> is and it is also much shorter in length.
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> -Dennis
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180320/ad6fbae6/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list