----- Original Message ----- > From: "Benjamin Hindman" <b...@eecs.berkeley.edu> > To: "dev" <dev@mesos.apache.org> > Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 3:14:31 AM > Subject: Re: Mesos Modules Design > > > > > - create abstract classes to define interfaces to objects that should be > > modular > > > > We're all in agreement here! > > - build modules as static libraries that can be assembled at link time to > > create custom Mesos builds > > > > Okay, but unless I'm missing something here we'll still need a level of > indirection to wire everything together. What would that look like? > > Also, why ask an operator to go through the extra step of relinking Mesos? > Asking the operator to relink means they'll need a Mesos build environment, > while most folks will likely just have Mesos installed via an RPM (or > similar). I'm not convinced that getting a link error will be a better user > experience then getting a runtime error that cleanly prints out something > along the lines of "Version mismatch: the XXYYZZ module is not compatible > with this version of Mesos".
To ask service operators to re-link and possibly re-deploy mesos is a non-starter imho. One of the goals of enabling "plugins" around key interfaces is to avoid this type of operation. -- Cheers, Timothy St. Clair Red Hat Inc.
