Hi Al, On 13:38 Thu 18 Jun , Al Chu wrote: > > I agree with this on principle, however, we already support a plugin > system that allows users to develop proprietary perfmgr plugins. So I > feel that we already are down this path.
It is not about allowing or not - I thought about our support for doing such things. > Is the primary issue that this module "imports" new behavior into > opensm? I don't know the perfmgr plugin code that well, but my > understanding is that you can "import new behavior" into opensm via the > perfmgr plugin code too? So what is really different?? Right, nothing different. And this is exactly my point - why yet another plugin interface is needed? Sasha _______________________________________________ general mailing list general@lists.openfabrics.org http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
