* Lars Marowsky-Bree <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-08-20 13:56]: > On 2008-08-20T13:18:42, Wolfram Schlich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > But yes, clearly we hope to have more independently packaged resource > > > agents one day; it would be so cool if they were instead shipped with > > > the service package (and not our problem to maintain! ;-). That's a bit > > > beyond of what we can do with our package layout though. > > > Personally I'd rather prefer the RAs to be upgradeable independently > > from the service packages they are destined for being used with, > > as it makes upgrading the RAs easier IMHO :) > > How the service provider arranges their packaging and upgrade strategy > is their concern, not ours ;-) How often do you upgrade init scripts > without the service?
An OCF RA is not just an init script -- please do not forget the monitor functionality! Also, a regular init script could differ quite a lot from the init script functions (start, stop) of an OCF RA (check logic, error handling etc.). Also, when I'd find a bug in my RA, I would not want to wait for an update of the service package (which would also be quite useless for anybody not using the contained OCF RA and thus maybe cause unnecessary updates). > It's mostly a point of: they are the experts on the service, so they > should write the RA, not us. I did not mean that *you* (the developers of the Heartbeat "core") should be writing the RAs :) But I doubt the regular package maintainers are interested in maintaining a Heartbeat OCF RA they might not even be using themselves... -- Regards, Wolfram Schlich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Linux * http://dev.gentoo.org/~wschlich/ _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
