[Pulp-dev] Plugin relationship to tasks

Austin Macdonald amacdona at redhat.com
Tue Mar 27 16:23:26 UTC 2018

After some reflection, I think we have been too focused on the small points
(plugin complexity, URL organization, actions vs nouns). They should be
discussed, but we don't have consensus around the primary concern.

Correctness is what motivated this proposal, so I'd like to take a step
back and discuss only correctness.

My assertion:

Plugins should be able to define and enforce constraints on the content
membership of a repository.

My reasoning:

Some plugins have natural constraints on the membership of a repository.
Two Docker Tags of the same name cannot be in a the same Repository.
Manifest Lists cannot be in a repository without the Manifests that are
listed. It would be fundamentally incorrect to prevent the plugins from
enforcing these kinds of constraints. I think there are similar problems
with errata package lists.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20180327/42772888/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list