Ability to use Package filenames when publishing

[daviddavis]

Ability to use Package filenames when publishing

[quba42]

I guess I never replied to this.

I believe you are correct, pulp_deb will always use its own naming scheme for packages in the pool folder published via the APT publisher. I believe it stores the original package name in relative_path for the benefit of verbatim publications.

My question is if this design is really an issue? Even if some package is renamed during publish, so long as the generated metadata is consistent this should not matter to any clients that consume the repo. Or am I missing something?

[daviddavis]

I think the main issue that we ran into is that we migrated (or synced) our packages into Pulp and then pointed our hostname from the old server to Pulp. So we had to use relative_path in order to prevent clients from getting 404s. We have patched pulp_deb so we could continue using the package names (ie relative_path) from the old system to solve this problem of 404s.

We'd like to at some point ditch our fork/patches of pulp_deb (probably after the source package PR is merged and released) but I am guessing if we try to ditch our patch and use pulp_deb's naming scheme (instead of relative_path), clients that have the metadata cached will get 404s?

[daviddavis]

I guess we could test out to see if apt is smart enough to re-fetch the metadata if it receives a 404 when trying to fetch a package that has been renamed.