Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Alasdair G Kergon]

Please could you set up cluster/htdocs linked to
http://sources.redhat.com/cluster (but don't advertise it on
the front page yet)?

We won't check in the real web pages (apart from test ones) until
we go live.

And also add cluster to cvsweb please - again, we won't check in
any real source code until we're ready to publish it.

Thanks,
Alasdair
-- 
agk@redhat.com

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 340 bytes --]

Hi -

> Please could you set up cluster/htdocs linked to
> http://sources.redhat.com/cluster (but don't advertise it on
> the front page yet)?
> [...]
> And also add cluster to cvsweb please - again, we won't check in
> any real source code until we're ready to publish it.

I believe both these are now done.  Sorry for the delay.

- FChE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Alasdair G Kergon]

On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 01:58:40PM -0400, Brian Stevens wrote:
> or is this for a checkin email address vs. discussion list?

Yes, cluster-cvs@sources.redhat.com just gets the checkin details.

Alasdair
-- 
agk@redhat.com

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 715 bytes --]

Hi -


On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 06:49:12PM +0100, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 01:40:01PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> > >    sources.redhat.com/cluster/bedrock/
> > >    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gfs/
> > >    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gnbd/
> > >    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gulm/
> > > With a single cvs mailing list cluster-cvs@sources.redhat.com ?
> 
> Go for it.

Done, in that the /cvs/cluster CVS repository now exists.  Your group
may freely create and populate the "bedrock" etc. subdirectories.
I did not set up a web page (htdocs repo) for this project, nor any
mailing lists other than "cluster-cvs" (which is plain unarchived
at the moment).


- FChE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Brian Stevens]

On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 13:40, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> > [...]
> > Or how about:
> >    sources.redhat.com/cluster/bedrock/
> >    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gfs/
> >    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gnbd/
> >    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gulm/
> > [...]
> > With a single cvs mailing list cluster-cvs@sources.redhat.com ?
> > [...]
> 
> Going once, twice, ...

I thought it was already agreed to be linux-cluster@redhat.com,
or is this for a checkin email address vs. discussion list?

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 299 bytes --]

Hi -

> [...]
> Or how about:
>    sources.redhat.com/cluster/bedrock/
>    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gfs/
>    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gnbd/
>    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gulm/
> [...]
> With a single cvs mailing list cluster-cvs@sources.redhat.com ?
> [...]

Going once, twice, ...


- FChE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 06:55:01AM -0500, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
>On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 09:55:19AM +0800, David Teigland wrote:
>> Currently we have:
> 
>> sources.redhat.com/dm/
>> sources.redhat.com/lvm/
>> sources.redhat.com/lvm2/
> 
>> Each has its own page and CVSROOT.  It sounds like these are managed under a
>> single "group" administratively.  
>
>This was because we insisted that dm appeared as an independent project - 
>evms uses it without using lvm/lvm2 and we did not want to antagonise
>evms users by lumping it with lvm/lvm2.
>
>> In the same way we want to have:
>> sources.redhat.com/gfs/
>> sources.redhat.com/bedrock/
>> sources.redhat.com/gnbd/
>> sources.redhat.com/gulm/
>
>Or how about:
>   sources.redhat.com/cluster/bedrock/
>   sources.redhat.com/cluster/gfs/
>   sources.redhat.com/cluster/gnbd/
>   sources.redhat.com/cluster/gulm/
> 
>Depends whether separate CVSROOTs are *necessary*, and (as discussed on 
>irc yesterday) whether there's an internal cvs with some form of automatic
>syncing to the public one, or whether internal cvs and public cvs are
>maintained separately.

What's an "internal CVS"?  Isn't cluster-list an internal Red Hat
mailing list which is being exposed to a public mailing list?

Are you discussing Red Hat policies on an external list?

cgf

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Lon Hohberger]

On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 06:55 -0500, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:

> Or how about:
>    sources.redhat.com/cluster/bedrock/
>    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gfs/
>    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gnbd/
>    sources.redhat.com/cluster/gulm/

     sources.redhat.com/cluster/magma/
     sources.redhat.com/cluster/<unnamed-resource-manager-thing>

-- Lon

-- 
Lon Hohberger
Red Hat, Inc. --> http://www.redhat.com
My Public Key --> http://people.redhat.com/lhh/pubkey.txt

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Alasdair G Kergon]

On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 09:55:19AM +0800, David Teigland wrote:
> Currently we have:
 
> sources.redhat.com/dm/
> sources.redhat.com/lvm/
> sources.redhat.com/lvm2/
 
> Each has its own page and CVSROOT.  It sounds like these are managed under a
> single "group" administratively.  

This was because we insisted that dm appeared as an independent project - 
evms uses it without using lvm/lvm2 and we did not want to antagonise
evms users by lumping it with lvm/lvm2.

> In the same way we want to have:
> sources.redhat.com/gfs/
> sources.redhat.com/bedrock/
> sources.redhat.com/gnbd/
> sources.redhat.com/gulm/

Or how about:
   sources.redhat.com/cluster/bedrock/
   sources.redhat.com/cluster/gfs/
   sources.redhat.com/cluster/gnbd/
   sources.redhat.com/cluster/gulm/
 
Depends whether separate CVSROOTs are *necessary*, and (as discussed on 
irc yesterday) whether there's an internal cvs with some form of automatic
syncing to the public one, or whether internal cvs and public cvs are
maintained separately.

With a single cvs mailing list cluster-cvs@sources.redhat.com ?

> four to share a common mailing list (linux-cluster or something).
linux-cluster@redhat.com ?    [i.e. an easier-to-manage mailman list]

Alasdair
-- 
agk@redhat.com

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[David Teigland]

On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 02:39:13PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> > At the moment, we have multiple independent cvs trees for the different
> > elements.  Can we have multiple cvs trees under a single sourceware
> > project?
> 
> I'm not aware of existing sourceware projects that use multiple CVSROOTs.
> This is perhaps because of the degree of interlinking between CVS and the
> rest of the system (email patch distribution, archiving, possible bugzilla,
> etc.), or general system overhead.
> 
> In general, we'd prefer not to fragment sourceware into too many tiny
> projects unless absolutely necessary.  For example, what sort of
> administrative structure (group membership) differences do you forsee
> between the subprojects?

Currently we have:

sources.redhat.com/dm/
sources.redhat.com/lvm/
sources.redhat.com/lvm2/

Each has its own page and CVSROOT.  It sounds like these are managed under a
single "group" administratively.  In the same way we want to have:

sources.redhat.com/gfs/
sources.redhat.com/bedrock/
sources.redhat.com/gnbd/
sources.redhat.com/gulm/

Each of these would have its own page and cvs tree that we'd want to import.
These four could certainly be managed under a single group as well -- they are
related to each other like the first three are.  Also, in the same way that lvm
& lvm2 share a common mailing list (linux-lvm), we'll probably want these later
four to share a common mailing list (linux-cluster or something).

(There may be one more we add to the list for the user space resource manager,
I'm not sure; it may have a home already since it's been at Red Hat for a
while.)

-- 
Dave Teigland  <teigland@redhat.com>

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Wed, 19 May 2004, Kevin Anderson wrote:
> At the moment, we have multiple independent cvs trees for the different
> elements.  Can we have multiple cvs trees under a single sourceware
> project?

I hope I'm not stating the obvious, but would having different modules
in a single repository work for you?

Gerald

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 661 bytes --]

Hi -

> At the moment, we have multiple independent cvs trees for the different
> elements.  Can we have multiple cvs trees under a single sourceware
> project?

I'm not aware of existing sourceware projects that use multiple CVSROOTs.
This is perhaps because of the degree of interlinking between CVS and the
rest of the system (email patch distribution, archiving, possible bugzilla,
etc.), or general system overhead.

In general, we'd prefer not to fragment sourceware into too many tiny
projects unless absolutely necessary.  For example, what sort of
administrative structure (group membership) differences do you forsee
between the subprojects?


- FChE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Kevin Anderson]

Frank,

At the moment, we have multiple independent cvs trees for the different
elements.  Can we have multiple cvs trees under a single sourceware
project?

Kevin

On Wed, 2004-05-19 at 12:45, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi, Kevin -
> 
> > I know it is a bit late, but we would like to add the GFS and cluster
> > related projects to sources.redhat.com.   [...]
> > We have a number of different components, gfs, lock managers, cluster
> > managers, etc.  [...]
> 
> It sounds like you need a single new sourceware project - does "cluster"
> sound like a simple overall name?  You can subdivide your web pages and
> cvs hierarchy as you see fit.
> 
> To set this stuff up, I think the only thing we need is agreement on the
> overall project name, plus an initial list of mailing lists you need.
> 
> - FChE

Re: New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 559 bytes --]

Hi, Kevin -

> I know it is a bit late, but we would like to add the GFS and cluster
> related projects to sources.redhat.com.   [...]
> We have a number of different components, gfs, lock managers, cluster
> managers, etc.  [...]

It sounds like you need a single new sourceware project - does "cluster"
sound like a simple overall name?  You can subdivide your web pages and
cvs hierarchy as you see fit.

To set this stuff up, I think the only thing we need is agreement on the
overall project name, plus an initial list of mailing lists you need.

- FChE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

New Projects for sources.redhat.com

[Kevin Anderson]

Hi,

I know it is a bit late, but we would like to add the GFS and cluster
related projects to sources.redhat.com.   Our target is to have the bits
open sourced on June 1.  The bits are quite ready yet, but would like to
get the infrastructure and web pages set up in preparation.

We have a number of different components, gfs, lock managers, cluster
managers, etc.  I think we want to have a cluster page, with links off
of that for the different elements.  Or we can just have each package
with it's own main page.

How do we proceed and what do we need to do?

Thanks
Kevin