On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 09:52 +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote: > On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 06:52, Fabio M. Di Nitto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-11-14 at 15:57 -0600, David Teigland wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:11:00PM +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote: > >> > I'd have thought fence.git and fence-agents.git in one and cman.git > >> > and rgmanager.git in another. > >> > But I may be missing some of the interdependencies. > >> > >> I wouldn't mind either of those combinations. Maybe rgmanager's last > >> stand will be in cluster.git anyway... if so, then it's not a factor. > >> > >> I didn't have much reason for separating fence/fence-agents. We're > >> planning on unifying it all anyway, even if the agents are done sooner. > >> And I don't think packaging/releasing agents separately should have much > >> bearing on the source tree? (I've heard interest in putting agents in > >> their own package for Fedora.) > >> > >> Dave > >> > > > > There is actually an important difference for me to keep them separated. > > > > Each time we do a package update, the whole set of daemons will need to > > go through testing again, even if they didn't change a bit. > > True. > > Random thought - how about having the resource and fence agents together? > Similar things with similar update frequencies...
hmmm no.. same reason. they have different tasks.. different subsystems etc. Fabio _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list Pacemaker@clusterlabs.org http://list.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
