[Pulp-dev] pulp 3 bindings change proposal

Justin Sherrill jsherril at redhat.com
Wed Jun 19 15:20:07 UTC 2019

If a plugin provided multiple remotes, for example, what would that look 

in your example:

|-file_remote = fileremotes.remotes_file_file_create(remote_data) 
+file_remote = fileremotes.create(remote_data) Lets say the file plugin 
provided some other remote that still synced file content? Justin |

On 6/19/19 9:45 AM, Dennis Kliban wrote:

> I didn't get a note in my email, but I did see one on in the list 
> archive[0]. So here is my response to it:
> I agree that we could use modified templates to achieve the same 
> results. However, that means that we will need to modify templates for 
> every language we want to generate bindings in. In both cases the 
> generated client code will be exactly the same. From a maintenance 
> perspective, it is easier to add a feature to Pulp's REST API that 
> produces a modified version of the OpenAPI schema. It also means that 
> we can always use the latest versions of the templates shipped with 
> openapi-generator.
> The documentation site would continue to distribute an OpenAPI schema 
> where each Operation Id is unique.
> Pulp's OpenAPI schema does not currently pass validation because the 
> paths are not unique. In order to use the 'href' of each resource as 
> the primary identifier, it was necessary to template paths as 
> {artifact_href}, {repository_href}, {file_content_href}, etc. This 
> schema cannot be used to generate server code. However, it works well 
> when generating client code. The non-unique operation ids would be a 
> problem for generating a server also. However, they don't produce 
> problems when generating client code.
> Does this address your concerns?
> [0] https://www.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/2019-June/msg00061.html
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:54 AM Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com 
> <mailto:dkliban at redhat.com>> wrote:
>     As pointed out in a recent issue[0], the method names in the
>     bindings generated from Pulp's OpenAPI schema are unnecessarily
>     verbose. Each method name corresponds to an Operation Id in the
>     OpenAPI schema. The Operation Id is also used as an HTML anchor in
>     the REST API docs[1].
>     It is possible to generate a schema where each Operation Id is
>     shorter, but then the Operation Ids are not unique and all the
>     linking in the REST API documentation breaks. We can avoid this
>     problem by keeping the long Operation Id for the schema generated
>     for the docs and only using short Operation Ids when generating
>     the schema for the bindings.
>     The difference in usage of the bindings can be seen here[2].
>     Is there any objection to including such a change in time for RC 3?
>     [0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4989
>     [1] https://docs.pulpproject.org/en/3.0/nightly/restapi.html
>     [2] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4989#note-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/20190619/b613a0f9/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list