On Jul 4, 2012, at 12:11 , Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 03:16:17AM -0400, Ofer Schreiber wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 06:20:43PM +0300, Michal Skrivanek wrote:
>>> On Jul 3, 2012, at 16:53 , Juan Hernandez wrote:
>>>> On 07/03/2012 03:43 PM, Ofer Schreiber wrote:
>>>>> In our days, ovirt-engine-setup is a part of the big
>>>>> ovirt-engine rpm.
>>>>> This means that each time you need to build yourself a new
>>>>> ovirt-engine-setup rpm, you need to compile all the engine
I'd expect that when you need a proper rpm then you have to go through all the pain
and build everything from scratch to make it perfect.
If you want to test something and debug, etc, you'd not build a full blown rpm anyway,
Well, either way, if you'd have 15 minutes for me I'd appreciate you show me how
it's being done today….
>> Could this possibly be avoided by an optional flag to the
> It's problematic, as ovirt-engine-setup is a sub rpm of ovirt-engine.
> I have no idea how can we just build the setup without the engine, which is compiled
in a temporary directory (and removed straight after the build)
>>>>> I've started to think about separating it into another git
>>>>> (similar to ovirt-iso-uploader), so we will be able to build
>>>>> this rpm separately.
>>>>> This change is really easy to implement (actually, I have
>>>>> already done it locally), and sounds to me like it's the right
>>>>> thing to do.
>>>> I agree that is the right thing to do. Take into account that
>>>> this also
>>>> means that ovirt-engine-setup will no longer be a subpackage of
>>>> ovirt-engine, so you will have to submit a new package request to
>>>> it included in Fedora.
>>> not quite sure having 10+ packages is a win…
>>> - why do you have to have a separate git?
>>> - why do you have to recompile when there's a change elsewhere?
>>> isn't that a matter of compilation scripts only? (though
>>> understand size of the rpm might be an issue…)
>>> I personally do not see a point in separating of something
>>> inseparable…but that's just me perhaps:)
>>> in other words, if you would kindly explain me the benefits please,
>>> I'll shut up:-)
>> indeed - having another package, with its own release cycle and
>> versioning scheme is quite costy. and isn't ovirt-engine-setup quite
>> tightly coupled with Engine's db scheme? (I really do not know, I
>> probably shut up, too).
> Quite costly? why?
It is another package to release, that requires its own errata process
and inter-package dependencies.
If you envisage a user that would like to use ovirt-engine-setup of one
version, with an ovirt-setup of another one, then go ahead. I simply do
not see the use case for this, only the complications.
> engine-setup is not tightly coupled with the db-scripts, we just execute the createDB