On 07/25/2012 04:07 PM, Robert Kukura wrote:
On 07/25/2012 06:48 AM, Alan Pevec wrote:
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Daniel P. Berrange berrange@redhat.com wrote:
I think I'm in favour of keeping the 'openstack-' prefix on package names too.
Is the plan to leave all the python code in the python-nova package, with the openstack-* packages just adding init scripts, config, and dependencies? Or is the python code being split up as well?
In quantum, the python-quantum package currently contains the quantum core python code, but the quantum plugin python code is in the openstack-quantum-<plugin> subpackages.
Is the current quantum approach consistent with the proposed approach for nova?
Your mention of config reminds me that I'd not considered shared nova.conf file. Now each service can support multiple conf files, so we could have common settings in /etc/nova/nova.conf and specific settings in /etc/nova/nova-{compute,network,volume,...}.conf? I'm 60:40 for keeping a single /etc/nova/nova.conf
Anyway, where to package the shared /etc/nova/nova.conf? I suppose we could include it with python-nova and perhaps rename that package to openstack-nova-common to be clearer on the intent of that package. Alternatively we could create a new openstack-nova-common package to include this config file and other shared stuff like /usr/bin/nova-rootwrap? I'm 70:30 for creating a new openstack-nova-common package.
cheers, Pádraig.