[Pulp-dev] Should signing service be associated with Publication or Repository?

Dennis Kliban dkliban at redhat.com
Fri Mar 20 12:30:08 UTC 2020

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 5:45 AM Matthias Dellweg <dellweg at atix.de> wrote:

> Actually Quirin and I have also seen the difference, and we discussed,
> we should implement a combination, where you can specify on the
> repo-level but override the signing service with each publication.
> It is a little more work for a lot more convenience, imho.
> And of course it might be nice to see it handled as similarly as
> possible in both plugins.
I like this idea. In both cases though, the signing service foreign key
should always be stored with a publication. Is that what you had in mind

> On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 23:13:23 -0400
> Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com> wrote:
> > RPM plugin allows users to define a signing service per repository.
> > All publications created from repository versions of that repository
> > are signed with that signing service.
> >
> > The Debian plugin requires the user to specify the signing service
> > each time a publication is created. The signing service foreign key
> > is stored with each publication.
> >
> > Even though the implementation in Debian requires the user to provide
> > the service href each time a publication is created, it seems like a
> > stronger model. The signing service associated with a repository can
> > change thus making it challenging to keep track of which signing
> > service was used to create a publication.
> >
> > We should change the behavior in the RPM plugin before we release this
> > feature.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20200320/d6ece48a/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list