Skip to content
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

Solution for deletion via tracker #22

Open
jjeising opened this issue Dec 29, 2016 · 6 comments
Open

Solution for deletion via tracker #22

jjeising opened this issue Dec 29, 2016 · 6 comments

Comments

@jjeising
Copy link

At 33C3 we talked about the following solution for rerelease and deletion:

  • Support deletion of talks via ready to remove. This is an explicit command.

  • Always delete recordings and replace on rerelease. Update metadata when master ticket is rereleased.

@saerdnaer
Copy link
Member

saerdnaer commented Jun 28, 2017

I suggest to discuss re-releasing in #8 and use this ticket for discussion of a 'deletion via tracker' feature.

@derpeter derpeter changed the title Solution for Rerelease/Deletion Solution for deletion via tracker Nov 18, 2017
@derpeter
Copy link
Contributor

@jjeising as ready to remove is a different state than the one the publishing usually listens to, would you prefer:

  1. the script to as on every run for ticket in both states
  2. we run two systemd units with differents configs for the script
  3. we run the delete script only when we know we need it to delete things

i would prefer that last option as a delete script running all the time maybe a bad idea, on the other hand this would allow e.g. erfas who have only access to their tracker project to delete there own talks.

@a-tze
Copy link
Contributor

a-tze commented Dec 20, 2017

I'd prefer 3. for the same reason, but this could be circumvented by giving the delete script distinct credentials, so that it has to be explicitly enabled as a project worker to do something harmful. In such an environment, 2. is also fine.

@jjeising
Copy link
Author

I think all processes here should be fully automated, the only management interface should be the Tracker. Therefore I would prefer option 2 (or even 1 … if it's just a different config and not a different base script, why not put it in one worker, that asks for both types).

@derpeter
Copy link
Contributor

it will be the same script in all 3 cases.
option 2 would have the advantage that we can disable the services independently.
@jjeising what is your opinion on @a-tze suggestion to use a different worker token for the delete job?

@jjeising
Copy link
Author

what is your opinion on atzes suggestion to use a different worker token for the delete job?

Until the new worker API with finer control is available this could a good idea.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants