Re: [vdsm] VDSM Repository Reorganization
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:17:39PM -0500, Federico Simoncelli wrote:
It is some time now that we are discussing an eventual repository
reorganization for vdsm. In fact I'm sure that we all experienced
at least once the discomfort of having several modules scattered
around the tree.
The main goal of the reorganization would be to place the modules
in their proper location so that they can be used (imported) without
any special change (or hack) even when the code is executed inside
the development repository (e.g. tests).
Recently there has been an initial proposal about moving some of
these modules:
http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/11858/
That spawned an interesting discussion that must involve the entire
community; in fact before starting any work we should try to converge
on a decision for the final repository structure in order to minimize
the discomfort for the contributors that will be forced to rebase
their pending gerrit patches. Even if the full reorganization won't
happen in a short time I think we should plan the entire structure
now and then eventually move only few relevant modules to their final
location.
To start the discussion I'm attaching here a sketch of the vdsm
repository structure that I envision:
.
|-- client
| |-- [...]
| `-- vdsClient.py
|-- common
| |-- [...]
| |-- betterPopen
| | `-- [...]
| `-- vdsm
| |-- [...]
| `-- config.py
|-- contrib
| |-- [...]
| |-- nfs-check.py
| `-- sos
|-- daemon
| |-- [...]
| |-- supervdsm.py
| `-- vdsmd
`-- tool
|-- [...]
`-- vdsm-tool
Wondering if common should be named lib since you'll most likely want to
install it to the python lib dir anyway. Minor bikeshedding.
Why the distinction between client and tool? Do you expect other scripts
to be added and give them all their own directory? I'd expect that most
of their code would mostly live in vdsm and the actual executables are
thin wrappers. This would match up with the scripts dir distutils has.
Where do the hooks go?
This would allow any component (daemon, client, tool, etc...) to run
in place with the only addition of PYTHONPATH=$(top_srcdir)/common.
The tests would need also the additional component path but that is
a given since it's what they should be testing.
+1 on fewer hacks to load the environment.
Once the components are in the proper place we can eventually start
using distutils inside the Makefile.am files in order to simplify the
installation process (and also as verification that our repository
structure is complying with the python standards).
+1 IMHO use of auto* should be minimized when developing python.