High-Availability Linux Development List <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 2008-04-11T13:55:04, Andrew Beekhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > As Lars mentioned yesterday, the reason for 2.1.4 is to allow time for some > > > additional project changes (both managerial and technical). > > > > > > Part of these changes are to split the, currently monolithic, Heartbeat > > > project into logical components that can be updated/released/replaced > > > independently of the other pieces. > > > > > > The current plan is to have 4 pieces (Two of which already exist. All > > > names are suggestions only). > > > In order of build sequence, they are: > > > * heartbeat-core > > > * heartbeat-stack > > > * pacemaker > > > * cluster-extras > > > > For consistency, I'd suggest to name them > > linux-ha-{core,heartbeat,pacemaker,mgmt}, instead of jumping all over > > the place with the names ;-) > > > > (We could shorten linux-ha- to lha-, but why hurt the brand?) > > > Lots of '-'s in there, but I don't mind too much > Except for pacemaker, which wont be adopting either form of the prefix. > > > > > > * heartbeat-core (alternate name: cluster-core, lha-core) > > > This project would contain all the pieces relevant to the operation of a > > > single node. > > > Conceptually, the project would include: > > > - clplumbing (including logging) > > > - pils > > > > We might even merge these two into "plumbing". > > I see you're already into naming the packages :-) > > > > - lrm > > > - resource agents > > > - stonith plugins + cli > > > > I agree. > > > > linux-ha-core-{plumbing,lrm,ra,stonith} > > fair enough > > > > > > * heartbeat-stack > > > > I prefer linux-ha-heartbeat. > > > linux-ha-heartbeat; there's some opportunity to split this into v1 and > > v2, but I'm not sure this bit is worth the effort. > > agreed > > > > The next two projects are already operational and are presented mostly for > > > the sake of completeness. > > > > > > > > > * pacemaker > > > This project contains all the pieces relevant to the v2/CRM/Pacemaker > > > cluster resource manager. > > > Conceptually, the project includes: > > > - cts > > > - crm command line tools > > > - crm (cib, crmd, pengine, tengine, pingd, attrd, OpenAIS plugin) > > > > Does hb_report go here as well and gets renamed to > > cluster_support_report maybe? > > makes sense - most of the functionality (i think) is related to > pacemaker and getting it's PE files, configs, etc > > dejan? > > > linux-ha-pacemaker{,-cts}? Not sure about splitting off CTS, actually, > > but worth a thought. Don't see anything else here which could sanely be > > split-off. > > Just "pacemaker". You're getting a bit carried away with the prefix there :-) > And I agree that there is limited value in splitting off CTS - > especially if we're going to advocate its use more and more. > > > in the packag > > > > > > > * cluster-extras (currently known as pygui which isn't the best name) > > > This project contains high-level management tools and infrastructure. > > > Conceptually, the project includes: > > > - mgmtd > > > - cim > > > - snmp > > > - tsa_plugin > > > - gui (client) > > > > linux-ha-mgmt-{daemon,cim,snmp,tsa,gui1} > > s/linux-ha/cluster/ ? > > > > (I suggest "gui1" or something similar as I expect we'd have several new > > GUIs in the future.) > > gui1 looks horrid > how about pygui (since its written in python) ?
I just want to add my two cents here, with my little experience as port maintainer for OpenBSD. First, I do not care about the names of the packages, anyone would be fine ;) Second, please do not split everything into a single separate software. Not every OS/Distribution is like Debian, with its thousands small packages. E.g. my first porting attemt was to create the same amount of sub-packages as I install on e.g. suse. That was rejected, "we are not debian". Therefore the OpenBSD port is divided into a main package, and a -gui, and a -snmp package, just only because of the different dependencies of the different parts. However, I think I can deal with any solution, its just that one will be easier than an other... cheers Sebastian _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
