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

Tue Mar 20 16:14:06 UTC 2018

I guess, you meant 'RepositoryVersions' there. Maybe it is just a typo,
or maybe your subconciousness already adepted to this change. ;)

I'm +1, because from the REST API or model view, you do not ask what
changed, but rather what is in that snapshot|version.
And since you are renaming all models of pulp3 atm, you are giving a
plugin maintainer a hard time, anyway. I think, it's now or never.

Matthias

On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 11:55:14 -0400
David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:

> I’m not too worried about the change being too large. However, I
> agree with @dalley though about snapshot not fitting my mental model
> of how I view snapshots so any work seems like a loss to me.
> 
> I’m at -1 but am happy to talk more about it.
> 
> 
> David
> 
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:08 AM, Daniel Alley <dalley at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > 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 better.
> >
> > 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
> >>
> >>  
> >  

Herzliche Grüße aus München

Matthias Dellweg
______________________________________________________ 
Dr. Matthias M. Dellweg

(Open Source Software Engineer)

Tel: +49 (0)89 452 35 38-12
Fax: +49 (0)89 452 35 38-290
E-Mail: dellweg at atix.de

ATIX - The Linux & Open Source Company

ATIX Informationstechnologie und Consulting AG
Parkring 15
85748 Garching bei München
www.atix.de

Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, Registernummer: HRB 168930
USt.-Id.: DE209485962
Vorstand: Thomas Merz (Vors.), Mark Hlawatschek
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Dr. Martin Buss
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20180320/b94916b3/attachment.sig>