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

[MIG] storage_backend_s3: Migration to 16.0 #235

Closed
wants to merge 50 commits into from

Conversation

vince-dynapps
Copy link

No description provided.

sebastienbeau and others added 30 commits March 3, 2023 07:43
- refactor the way to build the url (use a generic base_url).
- make more generic the storage backend by moving specific feature in
  storage file
- better name for variable "name" in store and retrieve method use
  "relative_path" instead
- extra amazon S3 storage component in a separated module with test
  using vcrpy
…t with the specifiation of the type of file binary or base64
* support custom endpoint
* refactor bucket handling
* re-register vcrpy tests
@rven rven force-pushed the 16.0-mig-storage_backend_s3 branch 6 times, most recently from a3ea5e6 to 0e1f0ef Compare March 3, 2023 13:11
@rven rven force-pushed the 16.0-mig-storage_backend_s3 branch from 0e1f0ef to df8b8e7 Compare March 3, 2023 13:38
@yvaucher
Copy link
Member

/ocabot migration storage_backend_s3

@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot added this to the 16.0 milestone May 23, 2023
@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot mentioned this pull request May 23, 2023
5 tasks
"license": "LGPL-3",
"installable": True,
"external_dependencies": {"python": ["boto3"]},
"depends": ["storage_backend"],

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Something confusing for me

In issue #251, @lmignon wrote that storage_backend addon will be renamed in fs_storage, and we can see in 16.0 branch we have fs_storage

So, why in this PR storage_backend_s3 still depends on storage_backend instead of fs_backend ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@abdounasser202 Since the development of the new approach based of fsspecs takes a lot of time, I decided to keep storage_* addons in 16 next to the new fs_* addons even if they cover the same functionalities... It might also be a good idea to facilitate migration from one to another and not block projects that need these features now without being able to wait for the fs_* modules to be finalised.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, @lmignon
then as I'm migrating storage_backend_ftp, it will then be better to have one depending on storage_backend and other one depending on fs_storage to keep both ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, @lmignon then as I'm migrating storage_backend_ftp, it will then be better to have one depending on storage_backend and other one depending on fs_storage to keep both ?

@abdounasser202

fs_storage supports natively ftp/ sftp / , S3, azure, DB, ... backends since it uses the fsspec python lib as client layer to communicate with external storage. We don't need additionnal addon by storage we want to support.

@lmignon
Copy link
Contributor

lmignon commented Oct 5, 2023

@vince-dynapps What's the status of this PR?

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 4, 2024

There hasn't been any activity on this pull request in the past 4 months, so it has been marked as stale and it will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 30 days.
If you want this PR to never become stale, please ask a PSC member to apply the "no stale" label.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Feb 4, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot closed this Mar 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.