Repository navigation
Review schemas for possible consolidation and clean-up #1043
Description
Description of issue or feature request:
FILEDICT_SCHEMA and TARGETINFO_SCHEMA are doing identical jobs but with the different representations of the information. Just look at their description:
This issue is based on a discussion with Joshua Lock: #1031 (comment)
Current behavior:
FILEDICT_SCHEMA is used in some functions when it is suitable and TARGETINFO_SCHEMA in other places where it would be easier to use it.
Expected behavior:
I think we should stick to one of those even if it means adding some additional argument to functions and doing little refactoring.
Activity
joshuagl commentedon Jun 5, 2020
We should review the schemas, consolidate and clean up.
FILEDICT_SCHEMA and TARGETINFO_SCHEMA are clearly serving different purposes, apologies for the bad lead.
Let's review schemas after #1031 has resolved, as that PR is renaming and cleaning up some of the schemas we are discussing here and makes it hard to reason about where overlap exists.
[-]Remove FILEDICT_SCHEMA and use only TARGETINFO_SCHEMA instead[/-][+]Review schemas for possible consolidation and clean-up[/+]jku commentedon Feb 16, 2022
Closing this issue as it was filed against (what is now known as) the legacy codebase: issue seems to not be relevant anymore. Please re-open or file a new issue if you feel that the issue is revelant to current python-tuf.
The current parsing/validation is likely not perfect but it is far easier to reason about.
More details
Current source code (and upcoming 1.0 release) only contains the modern components
tuf.api) andtuf.ngclientthat implements the client workflow,Legacy components (e.g. tuf.client, tuf.repository_tool, tuf.repository_lib as well as the repo and client scripts) are no longer included. See announcement and API reference for more details.