[Pulp-dev] Pulp 2 and 3 Service Name Clashes

[David Davis]

I agree with rchan and am thus leaning towards option 2.

Just to be clear though, we renamed pulp 3’s services recently to avoid
conflict[0] with pulp 2. However, it sounds like this solution isn’t good
enough as it’s hard for users to identify which set of services go with
which version of pulp?

[0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4187

David


On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 11:55 AM Robin Chan <rchan at redhat.com> wrote:

> See comment below on option 2.
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 11:31 AM Eric Helms <ehelms at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> In some migration of Pulp 2 to Pulp 3 cases, both will need to be ran
>> side-by-side on the same box. Given that pulp workers and pulp resource
>> manager are the same concept in both, this leads to their systemd resources
>> being named the same (or in today's case so slightly different enough you
>> can't tell them apart).
>>
>> I'd like to propose a change to the service names to facilitate this
>> situation.
>>
>>
>> Option 1: Include Pulp version in Pulp 3 services
>>
>> Example: pulp3-resource-manager
>>
>> Pro: Explicit naming and understanding of new services.
>>
>> Con: This locks services names to Pulp version, which will be odd with
>> semantic versioning if 4 or 5 comes along.
>>
>>
>> Option 2: Re-name Pulp 2 services to pulp2-
>>
>> Example: pulp2-resource-manager
>>
>> Pro: Explicitly identifies pulp2 services, easy to retro-fit by users
>> onto their setups or through RPM releases.
>>
>> Con: Requires users to have upgraded to at least a particular Pulp2
>> version to migrate to Pulp 3 (this may be required anyway).
>>
> [rchan] My expectation is that we will levy this requirement on
> upgrades/migrations anyway, so I don't think this con applies for this
> suggestion.
>
> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20190304/3b8ea0e9/attachment.htm>