[Pulp-dev] Unified interface for plugin actions
dawalker at redhat.com
Fri Mar 1 19:34:28 UTC 2019
+1 to what Justin said. I think it's a huge benefit to have the
differences between plugins show up in the api docs together.
Associate Software Engineer
On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 2:00 PM Justin Sherrill <jsherril at redhat.com> wrote:
> To me this makes a lot of sense, allows for plugin flexibility, and is
> more consistent across plugins.
> I feel like this will make differences between plugins more
> understandable by reading the api docs, rather than scanning the
> README's of the respective plugin and trying to work out what is different.
> On 2/28/19 1:42 PM, Austin Macdonald wrote:
> > Now that we have a handful of plugins that have somewhat different
> > workflows, surprising user-facing differences in the interface for
> > plugin-related actions are becoming apparent.
> > Example: Publish
> > File:
> > Create a publisher
> > v3/publishers/file/1/publish/ repository=$REPO
> > Ansible:
> > (no publisher)
> > v3/publications/ repository=$REPO
> > The difference is not huge, having a different endpoint does defy
> > expectations of a user who is familiar with one plugin, who then moves
> > to another plugin.
> > Plugins can also implement other endpoints, like RPM's one-shot
> > upload. The problem is that we have mixed idioms. Plugins are
> > encouraged to create task endpoints for objects (remote's sync,
> > publisher's publish), but they are also encouraged to create arbitrary
> > endpoints for any other actions. Users are not able to form reasonable
> > expectations for this part of the interface from plugin to plugin.
> > Proposal:
> > We could move all "actions" into a single area, namespaced by plugin
> > (by convention). This would allow the plugins the freedom to do
> > whatever they need to do while keeping the interface consistent and
> > predictable for users of multiple plugins. These "actions" could be
> > synchronous or asynchronous. Importantly, this would also create a
> > logical "group" of endpoints a user could look for in the REST API docs.
> > Examples:
> > v3/actions/file/publish/ publisher=$PUB repository=$REPO
> > v3/actions/ansible/publish/ repository=$REPO
> > v3/actions/rpm/upload/ file at ./foo-4.1-1.noarch.rpm repository=$REPO
> > Will this push back the RC?
> > No. The changes to the plugin API will be small, and the changes to
> > each plugin would be moving sync and publish endpoints, leaving the
> > logic almost identical. I anticipate the most time consuming aspect of
> > this will be adjusting the documentation of each plugin-- but since
> > they will follow similar patterns, this shouldn't be too much work
> > To sum up:
> > We should move sync and publish endpoints to
> > /actions/<plugin>/<action_name>/ to be consistent with other
> > plugin-defined actions like one-shot upload. This will look very nice
> > in swagger docs, and should provide more consistent workflows for
> > users of multiple plugins.
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pulp-dev