Skip to content

Publishing flat repositories should not report different distribution #1258

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
hstct opened this issue Apr 3, 2025 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #1257
Open

Publishing flat repositories should not report different distribution #1258

hstct opened this issue Apr 3, 2025 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #1257

Comments

@hstct
Copy link
Contributor

hstct commented Apr 3, 2025

During a flat repo sync, pulp_deb will record the user supplied distribution as the distribution for any structure content that is created.

During publish, pulp_deb will publish any distribution that ends in “/” (definition of a flat repo distribution), using a distribution of “flat-repo” in normal repo format.

We deliberately chose this design because we did not want to “lose the information of how the repo was actually synced”. However, we now believe this was a bad design choice:

  • It caused a bug.
  • If people query a pulp repo version for a distribution, they expect publications to use that distribution.
  • We are opinionated that we transform an upstream flat repo into a pulp_deb publication using normal repo format. Then we should fully stick to that decision.
  • We don’t actually lose any information, because we also store the original sync options for the optimized sync.

Proposal:

We should change the design to just store a distribution of “flat-repo“ for flat repo structure content, and then we should publish normally.

hstct added a commit to ATIX-AG/pulp_deb that referenced this issue Apr 3, 2025
@hstct hstct linked a pull request Apr 3, 2025 that will close this issue
hstct added a commit to ATIX-AG/pulp_deb that referenced this issue Apr 3, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant