Re: [Pulp-dev] Seeking Nomenclature

[Austin Macdonald]

We also have called it "Pulp to Pulp sync" informally.

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 3:23 PM, David Davis  wrote:

> So syncing from one Pulp server to another Pulp server is usually called
> 'natural syncing'. See [0][1].
>
> AFAIK, there is no official concept of master/nodes/etc in Pulp anymore
> since in the case of natural syncing, there’s nothing special about either
> instance of Pulp. We have used the terms ‘parent’ and ‘child’ though (as in
> the blog post I linked to).
>
> [0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/1488
> [1] https://pulpproject.org/2016/12/07/deprecating-nodes/
>
>
>
> David
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 2:59 PM, Eric Helms  wrote:
>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> The simple question is there any nomenclature used when referring to a
>> Pulp server and another Pulp server that syncs from the previous one?
>>
>> The background behind this question is as follows. Pulp at a time had the
>> concept of masters and nodes. With the removal of the official node-concept
>> and code, we still have references to Pulp "nodes" in our code base. If
>> there is newer nomenclature for the case of having a Pulp master that other
>> Pulp instances sync from I'd like to adopt that to help with parity across
>> communities.
>>
>> I should also ask if "Pulp master" is correct as well.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Eric
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
>
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] Seeking Nomenclature

[David Davis]

So syncing from one Pulp server to another Pulp server is usually called
'natural syncing'. See [0][1].

AFAIK, there is no official concept of master/nodes/etc in Pulp anymore
since in the case of natural syncing, there’s nothing special about either
instance of Pulp. We have used the terms ‘parent’ and ‘child’ though (as in
the blog post I linked to).

[0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/1488
[1] https://pulpproject.org/2016/12/07/deprecating-nodes/



David

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 2:59 PM, Eric Helms  wrote:

> Howdy,
>
> The simple question is there any nomenclature used when referring to a
> Pulp server and another Pulp server that syncs from the previous one?
>
> The background behind this question is as follows. Pulp at a time had the
> concept of masters and nodes. With the removal of the official node-concept
> and code, we still have references to Pulp "nodes" in our code base. If
> there is newer nomenclature for the case of having a Pulp master that other
> Pulp instances sync from I'd like to adopt that to help with parity across
> communities.
>
> I should also ask if "Pulp master" is correct as well.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Eric
>
> ___
> 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

[Pulp-dev] Seeking Nomenclature

[Eric Helms]

Howdy,

The simple question is there any nomenclature used when referring to a Pulp
server and another Pulp server that syncs from the previous one?

The background behind this question is as follows. Pulp at a time had the
concept of masters and nodes. With the removal of the official node-concept
and code, we still have references to Pulp "nodes" in our code base. If
there is newer nomenclature for the case of having a Pulp master that other
Pulp instances sync from I'd like to adopt that to help with parity across
communities.

I should also ask if "Pulp master" is correct as well.


Thanks,
Eric
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

[Pulp-dev] Pulp 3 MVP test plans

[David Davis]

Last week we agreed to help QE by opening issues in the pulp-smash Github
tracker for Pulp 3 user stories/features. I just wanted to remind everyone
to (1) open pulp-smash issues for features/user stories that you have
already completed and (2) open pulp-smash issues for stories you complete
going forward.

Here’s a list of completed stories for Pulp 3 without pulp-smash test cases:

https://goo.gl/ScbEup

And here is the pulp-smash issue tracker (filtered by Pulp 3 test cases):

https://goo.gl/jCsgZh

Please look through any user stories in Redmine that are assigned to you
and see if they already have pulp-smash Github issues. If there is a Github
issue, please review it and then attach it to your story in Redmine.
Otherwise, file a new pulp-smash issue. Here’s a great example of a
pulp-smash issue (although it’s for Pulp 2):

https://github.com/PulpQE/pulp-smash/issues/436

There may be some user stories that are out of date or don’t require
pulp_smash tests. You can skip those.

And again, going forward, whenever you set an issue to MODIFIED for a Pulp
3 feature user story, please open a pulp-smash Github issue. At the end of
each sprint, @asmacdo and I will triage the test cases.

David
___
Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev

Re: [Pulp-dev] issue #3360 follow up

[David Davis]

I like the name ‘mirror_repository_version’ unless someone has a better
proposal.


David

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 4:30 PM, Dennis Kliban  wrote:

> Earlier today several of us discussed issue 3360[0]. In our discussion we
> concluded that it is valuable for users to be able to create exact copies
> of repository versions within a repository and across different
> repositories. I have updated the issue to reflect what we discussed. We
> decided that this use case should be included in the MVP.
>
> The issue currently states that the parameter will be called
> 'mirror_repository_version'. However, we could not agree if that is
> actually the best name for this parameter. Suggestions for a better name
> are welcome on this thread or as comments on the issue.
>
>
> [0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3360
>
> -Dennis
>
> ___
> 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