On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:58, Iustin Pop <ius...@google.com> wrote: >> > - instead, add for each htools original vx.y.z tag, a 'htools-vx.y.z' >> > tag; is this naming fine? it will ruin completion, so maybe >> > vx.y.z-htools? (i think i like this better) >> >> Hurm. So, there will be no more new tags for htools, is that right? > > Not separate tags, indeed. Part of the main ganeti release cycle. > >> vx.y.z-htools tags are just for historical purposes? > > Yep. We could also skip adding the htools tags, as they remain in the > htools repository.
Ok. In that case i'd vote for either htools-vx.y.z, or just don't import them. I wonder how much stuff would break if we added a suffix for ganeti though. >> > - integrate htools/Makefile into Makefile (rather than call it >> > recursively) >> >> Is this being done by an include, or actual merging? > > I mean manual porting of the makefile rules to the main Makefile.am. Given that htools, even if in the same repo, is still something of a separate entity, personally i think an include is cleaner. Of course there may be practicalities that complicate things, i'm just talking on a conceptual level. If hbal is an optional (but default), replaceable extra, then separation seems like the right thing to do. Steve
