Bug 822951

Summary:	Relax restrictions on key names
Product:	OKD	Reporter:	Clayton Coleman <ccoleman>
Component:	Master	Assignee:	Ravi Sankar <rpenta>
Status:	CLOSED UPSTREAM	QA Contact:	libra bugs <libra-bugs>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	2.x	CC:	abhgupta, mmcgrath, mpatel, pruan, rpenta
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Triaged
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2012-10-16 19:52:10 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Clayton Coleman 2012-05-18 15:29:03 UTC

Dan and I had a long discussion about the ideal experience for keys.  What we "want" for users is for them to be able to give each key a unique name that is fairly recognizable.  The limitations on key name are too restrictive at this point because you cannot use spaces, dashes, or underscores (all valid filesystem characters) to distinguish your names.

I suggest we allow the following range of characters

  the majority of unicode "word" letters (i.e. other character sets)
  numbers
  underscores
  dashes
  spaces
  left and right brackets
  left and right parenthesis
  left and right curly braces

Clients are responsible for serializing and deserializing these to the filesystem.  Backends should not use the exact key name on disk (should sanitize).

Comment 1 Ravi Sankar 2012-06-29 21:38:22 UTC

Currently we are testing our broker code on ruby-1.8 and ruby 1.8 version DOESN'T have full support for character encoding. Only Regex engine has UTF-8 support and we can work around using 'jcode' ruby library[1]. But the ruby 1.9 version has support for character encoding and it may not be worth solving this issue on ruby 1.8 version. 
  We already have a user story [US2368] to move current broker code to Ruby 1.9 and Rails 3.2. Once this story is completed, we can tackle this issue.

Reference:
[1] http://blog.grayproductions.net/articles/understanding_m17n

Comment 2 Ravi Sankar 2012-07-04 00:03:50 UTC

*** Bug 794506 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Mike McGrath 2012-10-10 18:41:49 UTC

Please convert this to a story so we can prioritize it in the backlkog.  Once the story is created, please close this bug with the US number.

 - Bug Triage Meeting

Comment 4 Ravi Sankar 2012-10-16 19:52:10 UTC

Created US3026 to address this issue.