Hi, On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 10:50:17AM +0200, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote: > Hi, > > On 6/8/2011 10:16 AM, Keisuke MORI wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Thank you for all your efforts for the new release. > > > > > > 2011/6/7 Fabio M. Di Nitto <[email protected]>: > >> Several changes have been made to the build system and the spec file to > >> accommodate both projects´ needs. The most noticeable change is the > >> option to select "all", "linux-ha" or "rgmanager" resource agents at > >> configuration time, which will also set the default for the > >> spec file. > > > > Why is the ldirectord package disabled on RHEL environment? > > I would expect that it would be built as same as (linux-ha) > > resource-agents-1.0.4 > > so that we can use the upcoming 3.9.1 as the upgrade version. > > Because ldirectord requires libnet to build and libnet is not available > on default RHEL (unless you explicitly enable EPEL). > > Florian, last time we spoke, we were trying to avoid adding BR on > packages that are not part of RHEL, but then to build linux-ha agents we > need cluster-glue* that are not part of RHEL anyway. > > We should be consistent here. > > I am ok to allow people to build ldirectord. > > > > > We still use the resource-agents/ldirectord on many RHEL systems and > > if it was missing > > we can not upgrade them anymore. > > Understood, we are still smoothing a few corners after the merge. It´s > good people are spotting those bits. > > > > > > >> NOTE: About the 3.9.x version (particularly for linux-ha folks): This > >> version was chosen simply because the rgmanager set was already at > >> 3.1.x. In order to make it easier for distribution, and to keep package > >> upgrades linear, we decided to bump the number higher than both > >> projects. There is no other special meaning associated with it. > >> > >> The final 3.9.1 release will take place soon. > > > > BTW why not 4.0? :) > > just curious though. > > There is really nothing major in this release vs 1.0.4 for linux-ha and > 3.1.x for rgmanager agents, other than co-exist in the same tree.
Actually, while looking at it, I'd also like something else rather than 3.9.x. Can't put my finger on what's exactly the issue, but something like 4.0 would somehow look better. Is it only me? > We will probably use 4.0 to introduce the new OCF standard and the new > common clusterlabs/ provider and mark effectively the introduction of > new features. 4.1? Cheers, Dejan > Fabio > _______________________________________________ > ha-wg-technical mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-wg-technical _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
