Hi, I'll move bdev.py to block/bdev.py then (in order to mirror the Haskell structure), and then split off drbd.py. Helga, is it ok if I submit patches which just perform the move and split, so you can base your changes therein?
I still think it's worth a discussion if we want to separate internal from daemons from each other, and how we want to do that long-term. On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Bernardo Dal Seno <[email protected]>wrote: > On 17 April 2013 09:54, Guido Trotter <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 4:16 AM, Klaus Aehlig <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Why not noded/block/drbd, then? > >> > >> Why not physical/block/drbd ? Who knows how we might restucture the > >> daemons in the future... > >> > >> (Instead of "physical" we could also take something like "hardware", > >> "devices", whatever; the point is, it would structure according to what > >> it is, instead of a ganeti specific daemon structure. There are also > >> modules that are not tied to a particular daemon -- now, would they > >> live at the same level as noded?) > > > > Then block/drbd would be perfectly enough, at least for now. > > The reason to put a module behind noded/ or masterd/ is to say "this > > should be only used by this daemon". > > Of course if we don't have that, why having a 3-layer structure? > > I think that a more important point is to keep separated the internals > (handled by noded) from the interface exported (to masterd). > > Bernardo > -- Thomas Thrainer | Software Engineer | [email protected] | Google Germany GmbH Dienerstr. 12 80331 München Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Katherine Stephens
