On 08/16/2018 11:53 AM, Michal Novotny wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 11:43 AM Jeremy Cline <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: <snip> >> The current solution is fedmsg-meta-fedora-infrastructure, a central >> Python module where schema are poorly encoded by a series of if/else >> statements. It also regularly breaks when message schema change. For >> example, I have 2200 emails from the notifications system about how some >> Copr and Bodhi messages are unparsable. No one remembers to update the >> package, and it ultimately means their messages are dropped or arrive to >> users as incomprehensible JSON. >> > > Yup, on behalf of Copr, I am sorry for that. This was caused by some bugs in > our code. But these things would be captured by the publisher validation in > the new framework. By the way, we would also like to have validators like > "NEVRA" available, maybe in a library, maybe we can implement it ourselves. > In one of the instances, we weren't sending release (I think) and it broke > the > fedmsg-meta service. That service is kind of sensitive. > Yes, it is sensitive. And to be clear, I'm not pointing fingers here. It's just a good example of how what we're doing now doesn't work. I want to put the ability (and responsibility) to making a message readable and documented in the hands of app maintainers. > >> >> With the current approach, you can just implement a __str__ method on a >> class you keep in the same Git repo you use for your project. You can >> write documentation on the classes so users can see what messages your >> projects send. You can release it whenever you see fit, not when whoever >> maintains fedmsg-meta has time to make a release. >> >> It seems like your main objection is the Python package. Personally, I >> think making a Python package is a trivial amount of work for the >> benefit of being able to define an arbitrary Python API to work with >> your messages, but maybe that's not a widely-shared sentiment. If it's >> not and we decide the only thing we really want in addition to the >> message is a human-readable string, maybe we could include that in the >> message in a standard way. > > > Might be also a way. So, am I right in saying your main objection is the Python package? Or do you object to then packaging that as an RPM? -- Jeremy Cline XMPP: jeremy@xxxxxxxxxx IRC: jcline _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/2SG6GU77VUIXXQPTP2LFGROWQFO3LSHN/
