[Engine-devel] New oVirt GIT Repo Request

[Itamar Heim]

On 02/13/2012 03:20 PM, Keith Robertson wrote:
> On 02/13/2012 10:57 AM, Douglas Landgraf wrote:
>> On 02/13/2012 07:31 AM, Barak Azulay wrote:
>>> On 02/12/2012 03:32 PM, Keith Robertson wrote:
>>>> On 02/11/2012 05:41 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
>>>>> On 02/10/2012 04:42 PM, Keith Robertson wrote:
>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to move some of the oVirt tools into their own GIT
>>>>>> repos so
>>>>>> that they are easier to manage/maintain. In particular, I would
>>>>>> like to
>>>>>> move the ovirt-log-collector, ovirt-iso-uploader, and
>>>>>> ovirt-image-uploader each into their own GIT repos.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Plan:
>>>>>> Step 1: Create naked GIT repos on oVirt.org for the 3 tools.
>>>>>> Step 2: Link git repos to gerrit.
>>>>>
>>>>> above two are same step - create a project in gerrit.
>>>>> I'll do that if list doesn't have any objections by monday.
>>>> Sure, np.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Step 3: Populate naked GIT repos with source and build standalone
>>>>>> spec
>>>>>> files for each.
>>>>>> Step 4: In one patch do both a) and b)...
>>>>>> a) Update oVirt manager GIT repo by removing tool source.
>>>>>> b) Update oVirt manager GIT repo such that spec has dependencies on 3
>>>>>> new RPMs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Optional:
>>>>>> - These three tools share some python classes that are very
>>>>>> similar. I
>>>>>> would like to create a GIT repo (perhaps ovirt-tools-common) to
>>>>>> contain
>>>>>> these classes so that a fix in one place will fix the issue
>>>>>> everywhere.
>>>>>> Perhaps we can also create a naked GIT repo for these common classes
>>>>>> while addressing the primary concerns above.
>>>>>
>>>>> would this hold both python and java common code?
>>>>
>>>> None of the 3 tools currently have any requirement for Java code, but I
>>>> think the installer does. That said, I wouldn't have a problem mixing
>>>> Java code in the "common" component as long as they're in separate
>>>> package directories.
>>>>
>>>> If we do something like this do we want a "python" common RPM and a
>>>> "java" common RPM or just a single RPM for all common code? I don't
>>>> really have a preference.
>>>
>>> I would go with separating the java common and python common, even if
>>> it's just to ease build/release issues.
>>>
>> +1 and if needed one package be required to the other.
>>
> Sounds like a plan. Full speed ahead.

The following repo's were created:
ovirt-image-uploader
ovirt-iso-uploader
ovirt-log-collector
ovirt-tools-common-python

I've used the existing ovirt-engine-tools group for its maintainers, as 
this is only a split of part of the tools from using the engine git, but 
tools project was defined as separate wrt maintainers.