I feel a bit nervous to replace the TaskTag model with the direct relationship with the repository. I understand that all the tasks we plan to trigger are against/or related to a repo, but i just want to be prepared to unforeseen future changes where the TaskRepository would not get us in a dead-end situation.
----> Do we really need to allow users to search tasks by a resource/repo at all? I think this is useful and we should keep this. -------- Regards, Ina Panova 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 Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 8:17 PM, David Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > Originally I scheduled a meeting for tomorrow but on second thought, I > figured a pulp-dev thread would be more inclusive than a meeting. I hope to > get this resolved by the end of this week and if not then maybe we can have > a meeting. > > This is to design out the replacement of task tags in Pulp 3. I’ve got > feedback from a few other developers in terms of how to do that so I wrote > up a sort of outline of the problem and two possible proposals. Looking for > feedback/questions/etc on what people prefer. > > > Background > --- > > In Pulp 2, tasks have tags that either provide a task name/description or > info on what resources a task acts on. Tasks also have reserved resources, > which provide a way for tasks to lock a particular resource. > > In Pulp 3, we have models TaskTag and ReservedResource[0]. Tasks are > associated with the resources they work on via TaskTag. If a resource is > locked, a ReservedResource record is created in the db and then removed > from the db once the resource is unlocked. > > > Problem > --- > > The task tag model doesn't really fit Pulp 3. It's perhaps too generic and > totally unnecessary (see Proposal 1), or it could be redesigned to > accomodate other things (see Proposal 2). > > Also, we need to support created resources (e.g. publications) with tasks. > Refactoring task tags might provide an opportunity to do so. > > > User stories > --- > > As an authenticated user, I can see what resource(s) a task acted on. > As an authenticated user, I can search for a tasks based on what resource > they acted on. > > > Proposal 1 > --- > > Since tags and reserved resources in Pulp 3 will only store information > about a particular repository (not 100% sure here), it should be possible > to simplify the data model. We could ditch both TaskTag and > ReservedResource models and just have a direct relationship between Tasks > and Repositories (e.g. TaskRepository). This model could also have some > sort of field to indicate whether a particular field is locked (e.g. > is_locked). Unlike ReservedResource, this relationship would be > persisted—only the is_locked field would be updated when a task is done. > > > Proposal 2 > --- > > We could keep the TaskTag relationship (perhaps even rename it to > TaskResource) and we could add a field to indicate the nature of the > relationship between task and resource (e.g. created, updated, etc). This > field could not only capture what TaskTag is currently used for but also > stuff like created resources (e.g. publications). We could also have a > field to indicate which task resources are locked (e.g. is_locked). > > This would be useful for https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3033. > > > Questions > --- > > - What proposal do we want to adopt? > - When do we need to address these changes? > - Do we really need to allow users to search tasks by a resource/repo at > all? > > > [0] https://git.io/vF8iH > > David > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
