[Pulp-dev] Namespacing plugins, looking for feedback

Daniel Alley dalley at redhat.com
Tue Jan 8 19:21:30 UTC 2019

I'm not opposed to this plan, I just want to point out that it would make
the status API make slightly less sense.  The names in the list of
installed plugins would then not be the same as the packages themselves.
It's probably close enough as to not be a problem though.

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:23 PM Austin Macdonald <amacdona at redhat.com>

> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:12 PM Brian Bouterse <bbouters at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>> My understanding is that it's for both. It would be dropped from
>> app_label and that will automatically be used in master/detail urls. Is
>> that what others thought?
>> This seems like the simplest approach to me. My only concern with this
> approach is making sure that the database will be properly namespaced so
> there won't be collisions with other applications that use postgres like
> Katello. AFAIK, the plugin tables don't need to be namespaced since they
> are already in the "pulp" database. Is that correct? If so, +1.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190108/415a327e/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list