On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Milan Kovacik <mkova...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > Looking at the diagram[1] I'm wondering what's the reasoning behind > Pulp having to actually fetch the content locally? > Is the question "why is Pulp doing the fetching and not Squid?" or "why is Pulp storing the content after fetching it?" or both? Couldn't Pulp just rely on the proxy with regards to the content streaming? > > Thanks, > milan > > > [1] https://pulp.plan.io/attachments/130957 > > On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > A mini-team of core devs** met to talk through lazy use cases for Pulp3. > > It's effectively the same lazy from Pulp2 except: > > > > * it's now built into core (not just RPM) > > * It disincludes repo protection use cases because we haven't added repo > > protection to Pulp3 yet > > * It disincludes the "background" policy which based on feedback from > > stakeholders provided very little value > > * it will no longer will depend on Twisted as a dependency. It will use > > asyncio instead. > > > > While it is being built into core, it will require minimal support by a > > plugin writer to add support for it. Details in the epic below. > > > > The current use cases along with a technical plan are written on this > epic: > > https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3693 > > > > We're putting it out for comment, questions, and feedback before we start > > into the code. I hope we are able to add this into our next sprint. > > > > ** ipanova, jortel, ttereshc, dkliban, bmbouter > > > > Thanks! > > Brian > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pulp-dev mailing list > > Pulp-dev@redhat.com > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > > >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
