[Pulp-dev] Merging pulpcore.plugin into pulp/pulpcore repo?

Brian Bouterse bmbouter at redhat.com
Wed Oct 23 09:18:56 UTC 2019 

Thanks @dalley!

Yes the Pulp developers talked this over; here's what we came up with
(bulleted takeaways). Overall we want to make this a lot simpler, so we do
want to go forward this week with a few things:

# Actions
1. Move the relevant bits from pulp/pulpcore-plugin to pulpcore.plugin in
the pulp/pulpcore repo
2. Delete pulp/pulpcore-plugin repository
3. pulpcore will be the only versioned package, and will start with 3.0
4. A plugin API changelog will and plugin API docs will be available in the
existing site in pulpcore
5. Breaking changes for the pulpcore.plugin will be released only with 3.y
releases so any 3.0.z changes should stay plugin compatible

# Implications for Plugin Writers
1. Plugins should probably pin to pulpcore<=3.y+1 to guard against
pulpcore.plugin breaking changes in the 3.y
2. Must inspect the changelog API with each 2.y release to determine if
your plugin is compatible
3. Plugin writers must only import from pulpcore.plugin (still)

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 10:13 AM Daniel Alley <dalley at redhat.com> wrote:

> Since we decided to move forwards with this, here are the PRs:
> https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5580#note-8
>
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 5:29 AM Ina Panova <ipanova at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 let's talk about this more next week.
>>
>>
>> --------
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ina Panova
>> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>>
>> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 7:25 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that it makes sense to talk about it next week. I have a few
>>> concerns both in favor and against merging the repos that are not expressed
>>> on the issue. Let's remove it off the sprint for now.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 1:13 PM Brian Bouterse <bmbouter at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thank you for sharing your concerns. Let's think it over more.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:39 PM Tatiana Tereshchenko <
>>>> ttereshc at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Do I understand correctly, that the suggestion is not to have
>>>>> versioned api at all but document some conventions/expectations between
>>>>> pulpcore releases and plugin API?
>>>>>
>>>> We could version pulpcore.plugin as 0.1 as we were. It's just that
>>>> plugins can't use setuptools tooling to declare their compatibility. The
>>>> pulp plugin loader could check plugin minimum/maximum versions declared at
>>>> runtime though and disinclude plugins that aren't compatible with the
>>>> running pulpcore version. That would be a neat upgrade experience actually
>>>> whenever the pulpcore.plugin version goes to 0.2 which would be backwards
>>>> incompatible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I wonder if there is still a benefit to keep it as a separate package
>>>>> and as-is.
>>>>>
>>>> There is a benefit to keeping it as-is. What we have now is slightly
>>>> more awesome. The amount of problems it creates though is a lot.
>>>>
>>>> I understand that now we need to release both at the same time, however
>>>>> we are in active development now and when things are more stable we might
>>>>> benefit from having it separate.
>>>>>
>>>> The code imports heavily across the package lines, so I think we'll
>>>> always have to co-release, which is the pain because you have to wait a
>>>> long time for Travis to fully retest + release.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It sounds like we are back to pulp2 case, where we would need to
>>>>> release the core if any plugin api changes are needed, just this time we
>>>>> organised code better.
>>>>>
>>>> We could still have a versioned pulpcore.plugin which would be much
>>>> stronger.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Since we have a meetup next week, does it make sense to discuss it
>>>>> there? Plans on what we want or expect to support and what kind of changes
>>>>> we foresee in this area? Where the plugin api versioning will benefit us?
>>>>> I see many +1s, so it might not worth a discussion and maybe I'm the
>>>>> only one who is concerned.
>>>>>
>>>> I definitely want to talk about concerns. It's a big change. We can
>>>> delay some to think it over at least, call for more feedback. I was hoping
>>>> to keep discussion on the list though, even with us meeting in person. The
>>>> list I think gives inclusivity and record to those who cannot join. We can
>>>> remove from sprint now?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Tanya
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 5:58 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Done.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 11:49 AM Brian Bouterse <bmbouter at redhat.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes the issue is here: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5580
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If someone else can groom, I'm +1 to adding to sprint and labelling
>>>>>>> 3.0 blocker.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 11:01 AM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any chance we open an issue and get this on the sprint so that we
>>>>>>>> can maybe release this change in RC8?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 10:49 AM Mike DePaulo <
>>>>>>>> mikedep333 at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 10:25 AM Brian Bouterse <
>>>>>>>>> bmbouter at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I put some responses inline. I'm interested in what you think.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 10:10 AM Mike DePaulo <
>>>>>>>>>> mikedep333 at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Q: Will both pulpcore & pulpcore-plugin be published on PyPI as
>>>>>>>>>>> 1 package, or as 2?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I had imagined it would be 1. Users wouldn't be able to receive
>>>>>>>>>> pulpcore.plugin except through an install of the pulpcore==3.y.z itself.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Great, that makes things easier for users' manual installs, and
>>>>>>>>> easier for containers/packaging.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If so, how will you pip install from a pip VCS URL
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://pip.pypa.io/en/stable/reference/pip_install/#id32>?
>>>>>>>>>>> With #egg=pulpcore , and then #egg=pulpcore-plugin ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You wouldn't perform the second one anymore.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Great, that makes things easier for users' manual installs, and
>>>>>>>>> easier for containers/packaging.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -Mike
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -Mike
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 5:17 AM Simon Baatz <gmbnomis at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 03:50:54PM -0400, Mike DePaulo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    +1.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 3:26 PM Pavel Picka <[1]
>>>>>>>>>>>> ppicka at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    +1
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:23 PM Dana Walker <[2]
>>>>>>>>>>>> dawalker at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    +1, more straightforward
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Dana Walker
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    She / Her / Hers
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Software Engineer, Pulp Project
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    [3]Red Hat
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    [4]dawalker at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    [5][Logo-RedHat-Email.png]
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 2:55 PM David Davis <[6]
>>>>>>>>>>>> daviddavis at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    +1
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    David
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 2:38 PM Daniel Alley <[7]
>>>>>>>>>>>> dalley at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Very Large +1
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 2:10 PM Brian Bouterse <[8]
>>>>>>>>>>>> bmbouter at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Having just released RC7, there are a variety of problems
>>>>>>>>>>>> we are
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    dealing with as a result of having pulpcore and
>>>>>>>>>>>> pulpcore-plugin being
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    in separate repos. @daviddavis and I were talking, and we
>>>>>>>>>>>> want to ask
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    for feedback on merging the code from pulpcore-plugin into
>>>>>>>>>>>> pulpcore.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    I wrote this up as an issue here:  [9]
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5580
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Brian
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [10]Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [11]https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [12]Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [13]https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [14]Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [15]https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [16]Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [17]https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      --
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Pavel Picka
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Red Hat
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [18]Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >      [19]https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    --
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Mike DePaulo
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    He / Him / His
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    Service Reliability Engineer, Pulp
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    [20]Red Hat
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    IM: mikedep333
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    GPG: 51745404
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    [21][Logo-RedHat-Email.png]
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> > References
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    1. mailto:ppicka at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    2. mailto:dawalker at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    3. https://www.redhat.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    4. mailto:dawalker at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    5. https://www.redhat.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    6. mailto:daviddavis at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    7. mailto:dalley at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    8. mailto:bmbouter at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >    9. https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5580
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   10. mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   11. https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   12. mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   13. https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   14. mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   15. https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   16. mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   17. https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   18. mailto:Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   19. https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   20. https://www.redhat.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>> >   21. https://www.redhat.com/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> > Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> > Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Mike DePaulo
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> He / Him / His
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Service Reliability Engineer, Pulp
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> IM: mikedep333
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> GPG: 51745404
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.redhat.com/>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mike DePaulo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He / Him / His
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Service Reliability Engineer, Pulp
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IM: mikedep333
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> GPG: 51745404
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.redhat.com/>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20191023/e6d1a86d/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list