Re: [ovirt-devel] Registration duplication?
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 04:04:38PM +0200, Fabian Deutsch wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Douglas Schilling Landgraf
<dougsland(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/22/2015 09:42 AM, Fabian Deutsch wrote:
>>
>> Hey,
>>
>> I've seen that some new code landed to support Engine registration
>> using the generic registration approach.
>>
>> But it seem that we now have two implementations:
>>
>> 1. vdsm-tool register [0]
>> 2. ovirt-register [1]
>>
>> To reduce code duplication I'd suggest to drop one of these approaches
>> before we enter 3.6.
>> Or are there reasons for keeping both of them?
>
> I believe not.
Great.
>> My take is to keep ovirt-register which is independent and would allow
>> us to add plain hosts to Engine (host-deploy is then taking care of
>> the rest IIUIC).
>> The vdsm-tool approach reuqires vdsm to be installed.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
>
> +1 for dropping vdsm-tool register verb. It started as alternative and later
> we merged everything in ovirt-register project which is the generic
> registration. I can send a patch to drop it soon.
Right.
So let's see what Dan replies and then we can possibly drop the
duplicate effort.
To answer properly, I'll need to know about the current state of
ovirt-register.
Is ready and available? I know that long ago someone opened complex
RFEs for it, but the implementation never got into fruition.
I'd like to see vdsm-reg gone, and I'd like to see it gone now. With
vdsm-tool register merged, I don't think there's any remaining effort on
that front (except of removing the dead vdsm-reg code out of vdsm, but
this applies to both).
I don't mind at all seeing ovirt-node use ovirt-register instead of
vdsm-tool, and I wouldn't realy care if `vdsm-tool register`'s
implementation is scrapped in favor of calling ovirt-register.
Dan.