maas-devel team mailing list archive

[Andres Rodriguez <andres.rodriguez@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> >  * maas
> >    - Depends: python-django-maas, python-maas-provisioningserver,
> > maas-region-controller, maas-cluster-controller
> >  * python-django-maas
> >    - Installs: src/maasserver, src/metadataserver
> >  * python-maas-provisioningserver
> >    - Installs: src/provisioningserver
> 
> We could merge these into a single package, python-maas, say? That
> won't make a lot of difference to disk usage, but perhaps it's
> distasteful, or unclean?

Currently it is all under python-django-maas. I can leave it as is...
but maybe it is better to separate the code as it servers completely
different purposes.

> 
> >  * maas-region-controller:
> >    - Installs: maas-txlongpoll upstart job, installs DB, installs
> > apache2, etc.
> >    - Depends: python-django-maas, python-maas-provisioningserver
> >  * maas-cluster-controller
> >    - Installs: maas-pserv, maas-celery upstart job
> >    - Depends: python-maas-provisioningserver
> 
> Add to that a package for the CLI, which is designed to be installed
> on its own. maas-region-controller and maas-cluster-controller should
> depend on it.

I don't think they should depend on it. Package A depends on package B
when A needs B in order to function properly. In this case, if we don't
have the CLI non of those two packages will lose functionality. I think
it should be a Suggests.

> 
> Fwiw, the CLI bundles client API code, so it may be worth renaming the
> maas-cli package to maas-client, to indicate that it comes with both a
> CLI and client libs. Or... because the client code is Python, we could
> have:
> 
>   * maas-cli
>     - Depends: python-maas-client
>   * python-maas-client
>     - Installs: src/apiclient
> 
> That's even more work, so up to you.

The latter is what I wanted to do at first but decided to ship
everything in the same package to try to avoid having yet another
package. But I really don't mind doing it this way.

> 
> >
> > Now, I think it would be a good idea to create a different packaging
> > branch, such as: lp:~maas-maintainers/maas/packaging.cluster, which is
> > stacked on top of lp:~maas-maintainers/maas/packaging, so others can
> > work on it and we can also benefit from fixes that hit the packaging
> > branch.
> 
> I assume you don't mean "stacked" in the bzr sense?
> >
> > Either way I'd like to upload a new release to the Archives *before* we
> > go ahead with the package split.
> 
> Once that upload has been made, what need is there for another branch?
> We have history if we need to go back.

Once the final pre-split package is uploaded, then we do not need
another branch.

Cheers.

-- 
Andres Rodriguez
Ubuntu Server Developer
Canonical USA Inc.