[ovirt-devel] Moving configuration files to separate directory

[Francesco Romani]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Martin Polednik" <mpolednik at redhat.com>
> To: devel at ovirt.org
> Cc: "Francesco" <fromani at redhat.com>, "Yaniv" <ybronhei at redhat.com>, "Vinzenz" <vfeenstr at redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 10:06:06 AM
> Subject: Moving configuration files to separate directory
> 
> Hey devels,
> 
> last week, I've been working on patch series that moves most of
> configuration and "static" files away from our source code to a dir
> called "static"[1]. (based on the previous' week VDSM weekly)
> 
> Current version has static dir's layout as flat - keeping all files in
> the directory with few exceptions (mom.d and systemd). The downside of
> the approach is that we still have to rename some of the files in
> makefile due to possibility of name clashes if we had similarly named
> files (50_vdsm from sudoers and 50_vdsm anything else).
> 
> There is another possibility - hierarchy within the folder. Instead of
> current structure -
[...]
> we could structure the directory to a corresponding subfolders over
> the system:
[...]
> There is little downside to the second approach, that is more code is
> added to VDSM in a sense that more makefiles will have to exist. On
> the other hand, we can drop all the renaming and have the files named
> as they would be named on their destination after install.
> Opinions?

I have a little preference for the second option. I don't mind that much about makefile
proliferation because I still dream of switching to not-recursive build someday. [1][2][3]

[1] https://autotools.io/automake/nonrecursive.html
[2] I don't claim I am an autotools expert, I just find this idea *very* appealing from my
    developer-kinda-scared-by-autotools-I-touch-them-only-if-I-need-to PoV
[3] Also not 100% sure this will improve things *for us*, but worth a serious shot.

Bests,

-- 
Francesco Romani
RedHat Engineering Virtualization R & D
Phone: 8261328
IRC: fromani