On 28/06/2013, at 11:37 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree <l...@suse.com> wrote:
>>> >>> I'm not sure there's a huge downside in it for you? >> Ok, lets take attrd for example - which I've been wanted to rewrite to be >> truly atomic for half a decade or more. > > If it's rewritten in a way that doesn't affect external users but that > can be covered well by tests, I'd not think that having two versions of > the code in parallel would make sense, yes. attrd is quite tough to write unit tests for - almost all of its functionality requires multiple nodes. hence why i picked it for illustration _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
