On 5/21/06, Lars Marowsky-Bree <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2006-05-21T07:13:16, Alan Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lars has always wanted RAs to time themselves (which I thought was
> madness), so he may disagree with us on this.
If you can't represent me correctly, please do not a
On May 21, 2006, at 3:47 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:On 2006-05-21T13:45:10, Andrew Beekhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Another question... should things like an operation's interval/ timeout also show up in the meta namespace or the regular one?Momentarily ignoring issues of compatibility, I think
On 2006-05-21T07:13:16, Alan Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lars has always wanted RAs to time themselves (which I thought was
> madness), so he may disagree with us on this.
If you can't represent me correctly, please do not at all ;-) I prefer
to speak for myself.
I said that there's
On 2006-05-21T13:45:10, Andrew Beekhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another question... should things like an operation's interval/
> timeout also show up in the meta namespace or the regular one?
>
> Momentarily ignoring issues of compatibility, I think it should be
> the meta namespace.
Met
Andrew Beekhof wrote:
Another question... should things like an operation's interval/ timeout
also show up in the meta namespace or the regular one?
Momentarily ignoring issues of compatibility, I think it should be the
meta namespace.
I agree with you on this - unless the OCF spec says oth
Another question... should things like an operation's interval/
timeout also show up in the meta namespace or the regular one?
Momentarily ignoring issues of compatibility, I think it should be
the meta namespace.
And even the compatibility shouldn't be too bad since the LRM gets
these val
