[Pacemaker] [Linux-ha-dev] OCF resource agents: use pacemaker or linux-ha Mercurial repo?

[Lars Marowsky-Bree]

On 2009-04-17T10:17:47, Florian Haas <florian.haas at linbit.com> wrote:

> I'm currently unsure which Mercurial repo to work with when hacking on
> OCF RA's. At present the majority seems to still live in resources/OCF
> in the linux-ha dev repo, but some are in extra/resources in the
> pacemaker hg tree. And then all of the latter are named identically to
> corresponding RA's in the linux-ha repo, but differ slightly.
> 
> Andrew, Dejan, Lars, could you enlighten me please? Which is the
> currently "official" repo for OCF RA's, and what's the scoop on this
> handful of RA's with identical names, but slightly different implementation?

First, there should be no duplication.

Second, the "official" repository depends on what you want. If it's
useful only with Pacemaker, then it should be bundled with Pacemaker. If
it is useful only with lvm-clvmd, it should be bundled there, etcetera.
Besides the base RAs, it would even be awesome if the packages bundled
their own RAs (ie, apache came with Apache, drbd came with drbd, SAP
packaged the SAP* ones and so on). That is, after all, what the
"provider" is for.

There is no "official" repo for OCF RAs, because that is just an
interface specification.

So where you should send them depends on what makes sense.


Third, in the interest of aggregating RAs, consolidating them across
RHT/Linux-HA etc, we want to create a new repository and package
providing all the RAs we currently bundle, but that hasn't been done
yet.


PS: Please. No "'" for plurals. "RAs" good. "RA's" make the baby jesus
    cry ;-)

Regards,
    Lars

-- 
SuSE Labs, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde