[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

[Pulp-list] Decision: Handling Uploads to repos with feed

 Here is how I would like to proceed:

* We move forward with mmccune's proposal for a "--allow-uploads" flag on *all* repository objects.

* The flag will be set to *off* by default for repositories created with a feed; and *on* for default repositories created without a feed; as this is what is required to support the RHEL/Fedora use cases we know of today.

* For now, we will not expose the attribute (setting or getting) via our CLI tooling (client or admin); only in the data model.

* Attempts to modify the default values for this attribute will raise an "unsupported" error condition.

* Single feed per repository maximum.

* In the future as time and focus permits (and future use cases become clearer), we could/will add support for the alternative states:
   * On for repository with feed
   * Off for repository without feed


On 10/11/2010 11:17 AM, Pradeep Kilambi wrote:
Should we allow the case where, user creates a repo with a feed, syncs down the content and then tries to upload additional content to the same repo?


* A user probably will have an easy time adding custom content to their repos without having to create new repos


* We need to regenerate metadata for the repo. Today we get the metadata for repos with feed directly from the feed. * Will need to worry about what version of RHEL/Fedora pulp is running on for compatible yum metadata. * For Red Hat repos, we probably dont want to allow this anyway. So we'll need some extra rules to bypass this.

Overall seems like keeping uploads separate from feed repos is cleaner. User can always create a new repo, upload content and subscribe to both repos to get that additional content.

Lemme know your feedback.

~ Prad

Pulp-list mailing list
Pulp-list redhat com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]