Jan Pokorný <jpoko...@redhat.com> writes: > Thinking about that, ClusterLabs may be considered a brand established > well enough for "clusterlabs" provider to work better than anything > general such as previously proposed "core". Also, it's not expected > there will be more RA-centered projects under this umbrella than > resource-agents (pacemaker deserves to be a provider on its own), > so it would be pretty unambiguous pointer.
I like this suggestion as well. > > And for new, not well-tested agents within resource-agents, there could > also be a provider schema akin to "clusterlabs-staging" introduced. > > 1 CZK ...and this too. Here is another one: While we are moving agents into a new namespace, perhaps it is time to clean up some of the legacy agents that are no longer recommended or of questionable quality? Off the top of my head, there are * heartbeat/Evmsd * heartbeat/EvmsSCC * heartbeat/LinuxSCSI * heartbeat/pingd * heartbeat/IPaddr * heartbeat/ManageRAID * heartbeat/vmware A pet peeve of mine would also be to move heartbeat/IPaddr2 to clusterlabs/IP, to finally get rid of that weird 2 in the name... Cheers, Kristoffer -- // Kristoffer Grönlund // kgronl...@suse.com _______________________________________________ Developers mailing list Developers@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
