Task #2398: Convert celery task repo.publish to Pulp 3 - Pulp

Send by e-mail

Task #2398

Convert celery task repo.publish to Pulp 3

Added by ttereshc about 3 years ago. Updated about 2 months ago.

Status:

CLOSED - CURRENTRELEASE

Priority:

Normal

Assignee:

dkliban@redhat.com

Category:

Sprint/Milestone:

3.0.0

Start date:

Due date:

% Done:

100%

Platform Release:

Blocks Release:

Backwards Incompatible:

Groomed:

Yes

Sprint Candidate:

Yes

Tags:

QA Contact:

Complexity:

Smash Test:

Verified:

Verification Required:

Sprint:

Sprint 20

Description

Task name in Pulp 2: `pulp.server.managers.repo.publish.publish`.
Task implementation in Pulp 2: https://github.com/pulp/pulp/blob/3.0-dev/server/pulp/server/controllers/repository.py#L1039

1. Query for the instance of the Publisher's Master model that needs to publish.
2. Cast that Publisher master instance to a detail instance
3. Set the working_dir attribute on the detail instance with the working_dir context manager.
4. Call publish (it should take no arguments)

The comments in platform/pulp/plugin/models/publisher.py need to be revised.

Related issues

Associated revisions

Revision bf743323 View on GitHub
Added by dkliban@redhat.com over 2 years ago

Problem: API does not support publishing a repository

Solution: Add API endpoint to dispatch a publish with a specific publisher.

closes #2398

Revision bf743323 View on GitHub
Added by dkliban@redhat.com over 2 years ago

Problem: API does not support publishing a repository

Solution: Add API endpoint to dispatch a publish with a specific publisher.

closes #2398

History

#1 Updated by ttereshc about 3 years ago

Related to Task #2380: Create a redmine task for each 2.y celery task to be converted to 3.0 added

#2 Updated by ttereshc about 3 years ago

Tags Pulp 3 added

#3 Updated by amacdona@redhat.com over 2 years ago

Description updated (diff)
Groomed changed from No to Yes

We probably ought to do some business checks related to preventing relative_path collisions as well.

#4 Updated by bmbouter over 2 years ago

amacdona@redhat.com wrote:

We probably ought to do some business checks related to preventing relative_path collisions as well.

This sounds good, but I can't picture what it looks like. Can you describe the check a little more?

#5 Updated by dkliban@redhat.com over 2 years ago

Status changed from NEW to ASSIGNED
Assignee set to dkliban@redhat.com
Sprint/Milestone set to 38
Sprint Candidate changed from No to Yes

#6 Updated by dkliban@redhat.com over 2 years ago

Status changed from ASSIGNED to POST

https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/3016

#7 Updated by amacdona@redhat.com over 2 years ago

bmbouter wrote:

amacdona@redhat.com wrote:

We probably ought to do some business checks related to preventing relative_path collisions as well.

This sounds good, but I can't picture what it looks like. Can you describe the check a little more?

We do it in rpm now, but I think it should be a general tool.

https://github.com/pulp/pulp_rpm/blob/8720816fc489e6dd18e075896ed7ba0bf70541d8/plugins/pulp_rpm/plugins/distributors/yum/configuration.py#L494