Cron Provider?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed 06 Mar 2013 06:59:44 PM EST, Russell Doty wrote:
Do we need to consider a cron Provider?
Consider? Yes. Actually do it right now? No, not at all.
The issue is that cron's future is uncertain. It will remain in use in
the real world for many years at the least (and most likely we'll
retain legacy support for it in the future) but there is a new player
in this field. systemd recently added the ability to manage scheduled
events, and it does so with a language that is much closer to that of
a calendaring program's scheduling than it is to cron. So my major
concern here is that there may not be a way to model the scheduling
provider (let's call it that, rather than cron provider) in such a way
that it can account for both formats.
So yes, we *could* build a scheduling provider, but I think we want to
think very hard about what level of scheduling we want to support.
systemd's scheduler is a very large superset of what cron is capable
of, so I suppose we could build that first and then extend it later to
support the advanced systemd features.
I'm CCing openlmi-devel here to expand the conversation.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlE4ig8ACgkQeiVVYja6o6PuEQCeN5m2oEE1QQaL8rffvaF3Nxs2
PLYAnjWSdCZje5OpkrUROQdaiHFU7+Qw
=SNRn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----