Mark Michelson <[email protected]> writes:

> On 2/27/19 10:14 AM, Aaron Conole wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> Mark Michelson writes:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I have completed a *rough* POC of an OVN/OVS code split. You can find it
>>> at https://github.com/putnopvut/ovn.git
>>>
>>> Please take a look at the README file since that highlights how the
>>> split was done, as well as some known issues.
>>>
>>> My attitude towards this repo is that it is a throwaway prototype. It
>>> essentially proves the concept that OVN can include OVS as a git
>>> subtree, while not really attempting to do a production-ready job of
>>> doing so. There is a lot of unfinished work.
>>
>> Thanks for starting this.
>>
>> As others have noted, the git subtree is a strange sort of requirement.
>> Do you think it makes sense to have the ovs makefile install the
>> requisite utilites and man-page templates in known locations instead?
>> In that fashion, there's no need to have a separate clone of ovs, we can
>> just ensure that we've done an install of OVS and the build system can
>> search for the dependencies.
>>
>> I think it might just be as simple as adding the needed pieces to the
>> various existing automake variables (scripts_SCRIPTS, scripts_DATA,
>> maybe MAN_FRAGMENTS, etc).  If that is acceptable and works, you could
>> include it as a temporary patch in the OVN split directory until it gets
>> merged to OVS mainline.  That way, we could apply to our tree, rather
>> than needing a separate clone of the ovs repo, and when other downstream
>> projects build there's no need to clone the repo again.  rpms and debs
>> could have -dev(el) versions that install those files.
>>
>
> OK I see what you're saying. The idea would be that an installation of
> OVS would put the parts OVN depends on into specific locations on the
> filesystem, and OVN could then use those "installed" files as needed.
>
> I suppose that there would be some default locations for these
> files. If the files are installed to custom locations, then OVN could
> be told these custom locations at configure time.
>
>> I'm looking forward to the next spin, and hope that it will be based off
>> a newer cut of the openvswitch repository.
>>
>> Have you thought about using the `git filter-branch` facility to try and
>> preserve history, as well?  I don't know how important you think it is
>> to try and keep the history, but it could be a way to take an existing
>> OVS repository and cut out all the non-OVN commits (which is a huge
>> number of them, true).  It might be a lot of work for not enough gain,
>> though.  Just a fleeting thought.
>
> Jiri Benc had brought up git filter-branch back during the early
> planning stages as a mechanism for maintaining history. One issue he
> had brought up, IIRC, is that with git filter-branch, you're forced to
> maintain the same directory structure.

I think it's possible to do.  See,
https://gist.github.com/emiller/6769886 for an example.

> In my POC, I moved the ovn/
> subdirectory to the top level. Also, I think the amount of work to
> filter out all of the non-OVN commits would not be worth it,
> especially since classifying commits as being related to OVN vs. not
> related to OVN can be murky at times.

Agreed.  Probably not worth it.

>>
>>> Please let me know your thoughts on this.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mark Michelson
>>
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to