(sorry for not answering sooner, I am currently hiking in the mountains and my net access is somewhat restricted).
Hi Florian, Today Florian Forster wrote: > Hi Tobi, Thorsten, Kevin, and list, > > sorry I took my time to answer ? I wanted to sleep on this first and > don't make any premature decisions. > > On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 04:31:02PM +0200, Tobias Oetiker wrote: > > I love the rrdcached functionality and all the work you did on it and > > I would not want to miss it. > > > > But it also makes me sad to see you angry or unhappy. So if you > > feel that it is better for you to run your own show, I am > > perfectly ok with you doing a fork of the cache daemon and > > hooking it up to librrd. This will give you the freedom to > > develop it in any direction you feel is sensible. > > Yes, I think separating the development would make sense and > ultimately the open-source community will benefit from it. The > bonding between the daemon and RRDtool would be lessened, but > that isn't necessarily a bad thing in my opinion. RRDtool > wouldn't have yet another binary interface to worry about and new > releases of either project could be made whenever appropriate and > independently from one another. I wanted to have the rrdcached functionality in rrdtool for a long time, and the way it is integrated now, it is fine by me. Because rrdtool is both a front- and a backend to rrdcached I think it is perfect to have this functionality within the rrdtool project. > I'd like to act upon a consensus here, though. ?Forking? the > daemon, i. e. leaving the daemon in RRDtool and developing a > second one, is out of question for me: This would create a > diversity nobody would benefit from. I have the impression that you feel rather unhappy about some of my design 'decisions' and opinions. Because I will continue to reserve final say about goes and what does not go in rrdtool, I suggested a fork, so that you could develop your branch of the cached in the way you see fit. Since we now have a binary interface to rrdtool, you could add a fork of rrdcached to collectd and have the caching functionality at your end ... You could focus on the needs of collectd and develop the cache to be a perfect match. Don't get me wrong, I do not WANT a fork, I have no problem with you arguing and not agreeing with me on time as I think these discussions ultimately lead to better designs. cheers tobi -- Tobi Oetiker, OETIKER+PARTNER AG, Aarweg 15 CH-4600 Olten, Switzerland http://it.oetiker.ch [email protected] ++41 62 775 9902 / sb: -9900 _______________________________________________ rrd-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.oetiker.ch/cgi-bin/listinfo/rrd-developers
