[Pulp-dev] serializers in pulp 3 can't use write_only fields

[Ina Panova]

I like option number 2 more, even if there is more work behind the scene it
is more explicit and does not leave opened questions like ' why certain
fields are null'
--------
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 Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 5:24 PM Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com> wrote:

> Today during open floor we concluded that write_only fields cannot be used
> in serializers because any automated handling of them during OpenAPI schema
> generation will cause mutations to the schema which will result in
> backwards incompatible changes to our bindings users.
>
> This change should only affect the Content serializers that have a 'file'
> and 'repository' write_only fields that can be used for uploading content
> into a repository in a single request. Two solutions were proposed:
>
> 1) Use a single serializer for GET and POST and leave 'file' and
> 'repository' null for GET requests. This solution is the simplest for
> plugin writers because they don't have to do anything extra. However, it
> does cause users to wonder why those fields are present and null on GET
> requests.
>
> 2) Require plugin writers to provide 2 serializers for Content - one for
> GET and another for POST. This is more work for plugin writers, but will
> make it clear to users what fields are expected in each case.
>
> Even though I initially proposed 1, I am in favor of adopting 2. What does
> everyone else think?
>
> We will need to provide validation at startup that will check serializers
> for presence of write_only fields. The application should fail to start if
> any are present. This way plugin writers will know not to use the fields.
> We will also need to provide plugin writer docs that clearly state the
> guidelines around write_only fields and suggestions for getting by without
> them.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200427/118d5235/attachment.htm>