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

[Kersom]

I do not think we should names in Pulp 2. Since this can cause impacts that
we do not know. This will increase the amount of time that we will spend
working on Pulp 2, changing, fixing, testing. At this point less changes in
Pulp 2 is what I think we should do.

On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 1:10 PM Dana Walker <dawalker at redhat.com> wrote:

> As I understand the discussion on 4497, it was to be hyphens *in addition
> to* a name change, but you're right @ehelms that I only see the hyphen
> change.
>
> I'm +1 on @rchan's suggestion that the change take place in pulp2.
>
> Also given the migration and complexities with support, I agree with
> @ehelms that custom configuration of these names would be problematic, so
> I'm -0 on this unless we have a compelling user story for needing the
> customizability (assuming we are making the change to the service names in
> pulp2 ourselves).
>
> --Dana
>
> Dana Walker
>
> Associate Software Engineer
>
> Red Hat
>
> <https://www.redhat.com>
> <https://red.ht/sig>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 1:06 PM Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> I agree with @rchan that we will require users to upgrade to  a minimal
>> version of Pulp 2 before they can upgrade to Pulp 3.
>>
>> We should just rename Pulp 2 services in a future release of Pulp 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).
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190304/6a029932/attachment.htm>