Hi Chris, Glad to see the packaging is in place for the diablo Quantum release -- that's fantastic.
As for the directory structure, I agree that the current layout is cumbersome. The reason it was done was for ease of packaging; but if the distros are going to package it using spec/deb files anyways then it isn't necessary. What I was thinking is to move all of the pieces that were separated out from the quantum directory back into it and condense the paths. For example: <tree root>/client/lib/quantum/client/foo.py -> <tree root>/quantum/client/foo.py <tree root>/server/lib/quantum/api/foo.py -> <tree root>/quantum/server/api/foo.py Which makes it similar to how it used to be. This requires that if we want to keep our current setup.py scheme we'll have to rename them to setup_server.py, setup_client.py, etc.. The setup_x.py can be a guide for how the distros are supposed to split Quantum into multiple packages. For the package split I think we still want to maintain client/server/common/plugins so the spec files would have to incorporate this. I don't think that should be too hard though as pretty much everything will be in the quantum-common package; the quantum-client package will include just the client binary, quantum-server will include server binary + etc directory, etc. Does that sound reasonable to you? Thanks, Brad On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Chris Wright <chr...@sous-sol.org> wrote: > Hey Brad, > > Dan mentioned you are thinking of making some tree layout changes. > Would be great to hear what your thoughts are, since distros may need > to adjust their packaging to adapt for essex. > > The current essex layout seems cumbersome to me, but perhaps there's > some python-centric reasoning for it? > > thanks, > -chris > -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~netstack Post to : netstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~netstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
