On Thursday, July 9, 2020 4:51:29 PM CEST Tomas Tomecek wrote:
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 4:21 PM Pavel Raiskup
<praiskup(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, July 9, 2020 3:13:47 PM CEST Tomas Tomecek wrote:
> Do you expose some library which makes the conversion of various formats
> of events from various forges into uniformly looking events, like:
>
> event_type: source_change
> change:
> old_code:
> code_location: git
> clone_url: <url>
> committish: <sha>
> new_code:
> code_location: git
> clone_url: <url>
> committish: <sha>
>
> The format is to be discussed (with potential consumers, or anyone
> interested), but this is what we need on Copr side basically and I suppose
> that's something everyone else needs who wants to process the code change.
>
> I think we need a precisely defined set of events which is able to handle
> not only git locations, changes, change requests (it should be flexible
> enough to reference e.g. tarballs + patches, when we needed it in future).
>
> This is basically what we need on the "event reader" side.
This is really interesting. So far we've been only discussing
unification of webhook or message payloads on our side. All of this is
baked directly in packit-service's codebase [1] right now.
Yeah, the very same situation is on our side.
The biggest problem is that on github or gitlab, one needs to
explicitly
install the app or integration so the downstream service can receive the
events. Exactly what github2fedmsg is supposed to do.
Exactly :-/ what I think would be nice to have one common integration in
each forge on common "Fedora level". So we don't have to have
team-specific integration apps (I'm just refering to the component graph I
cited in original mail).
Our team should have quarterly planning in a month. Pavel, if this
is
important to you, we can bring this up on the planning session and start
with the refactor/unification so that we can at least share the code for
parsing and processing of the event payloads.
Sure, I mean .. it depends on how you found this useful for Packit service
itself, if you think that it makes sense to define the unified event
format - and if you could consume it?
Or we can set up a call and discuss directly so we all would
understand
the requirements.
I'll try to ping you on irc, thanks.
Pavel