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. > > > > Could this possibly be avoided by an optional flag to the build > > script? > > 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. > > > >> > > > >> Thought? > > > >> Ofer. > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > have > > > > 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 > > should > > 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 script. > > > _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel