`hammer content-view create --composite` components identified by name

Development
1

Hello foreman-dev,

I have a feature request for hammer, and I'd like some feedback on how
I should implement it.

Currently, hammer allows ids or names to be used interchangeably for
some commands (i.e. hammer content-view filter create --repositories
repo1,repo2 --name 'filter_name'). This feature is to add the ability
to specify content view components (i.e. ContentViewVersions) by name
when adding a composite content view (i.e. hammer content_view create
–organization-id 1 --composite --components string1,string2,string3).
The problem is that ContentViewVersions have a major and minor version
number and an associated ContentView, which as a name.

So what should we make string1, string2, etc. for a
ContentViewVersion, which is uniquely identified by CV name and CVV
major.minor version? Is there a better way to specify CVVs than a
components array?

Any feedback is greatly appreciated!

Andrew Kofink
akofink@redhat.com

2

We discussed it briefly on irc today and so far CVV "labels" seem to be
a way to go.
CVV label would be in format <NAME>-<MAJOR>.<MINOR> Everything gets
parsed on the CLI side, no API changes required.

The command would then look like:
hammer content-view create --name=cvC --composite
–components='cvA-1.2,cvB-7.3'

If no version numbers are passed the latest is used.

Would that be acceptable? Please comment.

Thanks
Tomas

··· On 04/13/2016 04:21 PM, Andrew Kofink wrote: > Hello foreman-dev, > > I have a feature request for hammer, and I'd like some feedback on how > I should implement it. > > Currently, hammer allows ids or names to be used interchangeably for > some commands (i.e. hammer content-view filter create --repositories > repo1,repo2 --name 'filter_name'). This feature is to add the ability > to specify content view components (i.e. ContentViewVersions) by name > when adding a composite content view (i.e. hammer content_view create > --organization-id 1 --composite --components string1,string2,string3). > The problem is that ContentViewVersions have a major and minor version > number and an associated ContentView, which as a name. > > So what should we make string1, string2, etc. for a > ContentViewVersion, which is uniquely identified by CV name and CVV > major.minor version? Is there a better way to specify CVVs than a > components array? > > Any feedback is greatly appreciated! > > Andrew Kofink > akofink@redhat.com >
3

I like it. One question, would this example update the CCV to the latest versions?

hammer content-view create --name CV
hammer content-view publish --name CV

version CV-1.0 created

hammer content-view create --name CCV --composite --components CV

CCV created w/ version CV-1.0 as component

hammer content-view publish --name CV

version CV-2.0 created

hammer content-view update --name CCV --components CV

??? CCV updated to have version CV-2.0 as component?

··· ----- Original Message ----- > On 04/13/2016 04:21 PM, Andrew Kofink wrote: > > Hello foreman-dev, > > > > I have a feature request for hammer, and I'd like some feedback on how > > I should implement it. > > > > Currently, hammer allows ids or names to be used interchangeably for > > some commands (i.e. hammer content-view filter create --repositories > > repo1,repo2 --name 'filter_name'). This feature is to add the ability > > to specify content view components (i.e. ContentViewVersions) by name > > when adding a composite content view (i.e. hammer content_view create > > --organization-id 1 --composite --components string1,string2,string3). > > The problem is that ContentViewVersions have a major and minor version > > number and an associated ContentView, which as a name. > > > > So what should we make string1, string2, etc. for a > > ContentViewVersion, which is uniquely identified by CV name and CVV > > major.minor version? Is there a better way to specify CVVs than a > > components array? > > > > Any feedback is greatly appreciated! > > > > Andrew Kofink > > akofink@redhat.com > > > > We discussed it briefly on irc today and so far CVV "labels" seem to be > a way to go. > CVV label would be in format -. Everything gets > parsed on the CLI side, no API changes required. > > The command would then look like: > hammer content-view create --name=cvC --composite > --components='cvA-1.2,cvB-7.3' > > If no version numbers are passed the latest is used. > > Would that be acceptable? Please comment. > > Thanks > Tomas > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "foreman-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >
4

BTW, here's the BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1309944

This one is also related:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1167688

Right now, there doesn't appear to be a way to associate a composite CV
with the latest versions of its children CVs. I would expect "Latest" to be
an option in the screenshot below.

​

Screenshot from 2016-04-13 11-15-00.png1230×107 6.53 KB

··· On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Tom McKay wrote:

----- Original Message -----

On 04/13/2016 04:21 PM, Andrew Kofink wrote:

Hello foreman-dev,

I have a feature request for hammer, and I’d like some feedback on how
I should implement it.

Currently, hammer allows ids or names to be used interchangeably for
some commands (i.e. hammer content-view filter create --repositories
repo1,repo2 --name ‘filter_name’). This feature is to add the ability
to specify content view components (i.e. ContentViewVersions) by name
when adding a composite content view (i.e. hammer content_view create
–organization-id 1 --composite --components string1,string2,string3).
The problem is that ContentViewVersions have a major and minor version
number and an associated ContentView, which as a name.

So what should we make string1, string2, etc. for a
ContentViewVersion, which is uniquely identified by CV name and CVV
major.minor version? Is there a better way to specify CVVs than a
components array?

Any feedback is greatly appreciated!

Andrew Kofink
akofink@redhat.com

We discussed it briefly on irc today and so far CVV “labels” seem to be
a way to go.
CVV label would be in format -. Everything gets
parsed on the CLI side, no API changes required.

The command would then look like:
hammer content-view create --name=cvC --composite
–components=‘cvA-1.2,cvB-7.3’

If no version numbers are passed the latest is used.

Would that be acceptable? Please comment.

Thanks
Tomas

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

I like it. One question, would this example update the CCV to the latest
versions?

hammer content-view create --name CV
hammer content-view publish --name CV

version CV-1.0 created

hammer content-view create --name CCV --composite --components CV

CCV created w/ version CV-1.0 as component

hammer content-view publish --name CV

version CV-2.0 created

hammer content-view update --name CCV --components CV

??? CCV updated to have version CV-2.0 as component?

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
Andrew Kofink
akofink@redhat.com