Mailing List Archive

New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Rasto Levrinc <rasto.levrinc at linbit.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, March 18, 2011 3:15 pm, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
>
>>
>> I personally like "core".
>> Yes, that may be boring,
>> but in a positive, HA conservative way boring, so that is good.
>>
>> If it has to be something more "fancy",
>
> Or "hacore" and there's still something fancy in it.

Perhaps my mind is broken, but i keep reading a silent "rd" in there
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
On 03/18/2011 11:43 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Rasto Levrinc <rasto.levrinc at linbit.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, March 18, 2011 3:15 pm, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I personally like "core".
>>> Yes, that may be boring,
>>> but in a positive, HA conservative way boring, so that is good.
>>>
>>> If it has to be something more "fancy",
>>
>> Or "hacore" and there's still something fancy in it.
>
> Perhaps my mind is broken, but i keep reading a silent "rd" in there

What about 'core_ha'? It doesn't have the "hardcore" issue, it's still
conservative and it strikes me as quite descriptive.

--
Digimer
E-Mail: digimer at alteeve.com
AN!Whitepapers: http://alteeve.com
Node Assassin: http://nodeassassin.org
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Beekhof" <andrew@beekhof.net>
To: "Rasto Levrinc" <rasto.levrinc at linbit.com>
Cc: ha-wg-technical at lists.linux-foundation.org
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 4:43:09 PM
Subject: Re: [ha-wg-technical] New resource agents common/core provider name?

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Rasto Levrinc <rasto.levrinc at linbit.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, March 18, 2011 3:15 pm, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
>
>>
>> I personally like "core".
>> Yes, that may be boring,
>> but in a positive, HA conservative way boring, so that is good.
>>
>> If it has to be something more "fancy",
>
> Or "hacore" and there's still something fancy in it.

Perhaps my mind is broken, but i keep reading a silent "rd" in there

Well, that's what is fancy about it. :)

Rasto

--
: Dipl-Ing Rastislav Levrinc
: DRBD MC http://oss.linbit.com/drbd-mc/
: DRBD MC http://www.drbd.org/mc/management-console/
DRBD(R) and LINBIT(R) are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria.
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
On 03/18/2011 05:21 PM, Digimer wrote:
> On 03/18/2011 11:43 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Rasto Levrinc <rasto.levrinc at linbit.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, March 18, 2011 3:15 pm, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I personally like "core".
>>>> Yes, that may be boring,
>>>> but in a positive, HA conservative way boring, so that is good.
>>>>
>>>> If it has to be something more "fancy",
>>>
>>> Or "hacore" and there's still something fancy in it.
>>
>> Perhaps my mind is broken, but i keep reading a silent "rd" in there
>
> What about 'core_ha'? It doesn't have the "hardcore" issue, it's still
> conservative and it strikes me as quite descriptive.
>

IMNSHO, that's redundant. It's the core resource agents implementing the
Open Cluster Framework. Thus, /usr/lib/ocf/resource.d/core is quite
sufficient if you ask me.

If we use /usr/lib/ocf/resource.d/ha_core, by the same token we could do
/usr/lib/ha-ocf/ha-resource.d/ha-core.

Florian

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/ha-wg-technical/attachments/20110318/231532b6/attachment.pgp
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
On 3/18/2011 3:15 PM, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:54:36AM +0100, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:41:34AM +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb at novell.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2011-03-15T23:37:32, Tim Serong <tserong at novell.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> halabs
>>>>>> hawg
>>>>> If pressed I'd probably vote for clusterlabs.
>>>>
>>>> Okay, this seems that we're now mostly all in favor of clusterlabs,
>>>> right? Or at least it's the one we got least push-back against ;-)
>>>>
>>>> (Just for the record and getting the last word in, I still prefer
>>>> opencf, but I can live with clusterlabs.)
>>>
>>> Either is fine by me.
>>
>> I was waiting for inspiration, but somehow it didn't happen.
>> Anyway, of all suggestions I found planet-ha the best. Though
>> mice-bikers-from-mars (or how was it?) is definitely a runner-up.
>
> "*labs" sounds too much like not-quite-there-yet
> experimental-level quality stuff.
>
> I personally like "core".
> Yes, that may be boring,
> but in a positive, HA conservative way boring, so that is good.
>
> If it has to be something more "fancy",
> I'd like it to be linux-ha.
>
> And if you insist on being fancy while still trying to avoid the "linux"
> part of it, planet-ha is my 3rd choice.
>

let?s go for core then....

Fabio
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
Ok, one more time, with added coherency, please find the original reply
below.

let?s go for core then....
>

How about clustercore, it is what is says it is, no labs, no linux, no
hardcore.
--
Dan Frincu
CCNA, RHCE
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/ha-wg-technical/attachments/20110320/3524da63/attachment.htm
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
On 2011-03-20 07:11, Dan Frincu wrote:
> Ok, one more time, with added coherency, please find the original reply
> below.
>
> let?s go for core then....
>
>
> How about clustercore, it is what is says it is, no labs, no linux, no
> hardcore.

Just as with digimer's proposal of ha_core, I maintain that that's
redundant. We already have "cluster" in "ocf".

Florian

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/ha-wg-technical/attachments/20110321/3dc57e77/attachment.pgp
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
On Mar 21, 2011, at 7:45 AM, Florian Haas wrote:

> On 2011-03-20 07:11, Dan Frincu wrote:
>> Ok, one more time, with added coherency, please find the original
>> reply
>> below.
>>
>> let?s go for core then....
>>
>>
>> How about clustercore, it is what is says it is, no labs, no linux,
>> no
>> hardcore.
>
> Just as with digimer's proposal of ha_core, I maintain that that's
> redundant. We already have "cluster" in "ocf".

Use the long form of ocf for the provider perhaps? opencf?
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
On Mon, March 21, 2011 7:45 am, Florian Haas wrote:
> On 2011-03-20 07:11, Dan Frincu wrote:
>
>> Ok, one more time, with added coherency, please find the original reply
>> below.
>>
>> let??s go for core then....
>>
>>
>> How about clustercore, it is what is says it is, no labs, no linux, no
>> hardcore.
>
> Just as with digimer's proposal of ha_core, I maintain that that's
> redundant. We already have "cluster" in "ocf".

"ha-core" is redundant, but it has the fancy property that it can be read
as "hardcore", I've thought, that was a good thing. Well, if you are not
interested I can use this name for something else. :)

Rasto

--
: Dipl-Ing Rastislav Levrinc
: DRBD MC http://oss.linbit.com/drbd-mc/
: DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com/
DRBD(R) and LINBIT(R) are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria.
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
On 2011-03-21T09:19:50, Andrew Beekhof <andrew at beekhof.net> wrote:

> > Just as with digimer's proposal of ha_core, I maintain that that's
> > redundant. We already have "cluster" in "ocf".
> Use the long form of ocf for the provider perhaps? opencf?

What I dislike about "core" is that it's not an available domain name.
In my mind, the "provider" should own that namespace, which I keep
associating with a domain name etc.

That "Cluster Labs" might have an "experimental" touch to it has never
crossed my mind. I thought it'd make a really good name. Oh well. ;-)

Implicitly, we're also picking the name of the "joint" project here, I
think; which is why I dislike "core". It is not descriptive enough for
my wishes.

If Linux-HA is disliked because of the Linux implication, I prefer to go
with "opencf".

In any case, let's stop this bike shed discussion and get this over with
in a defined fashion by the end of the week:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3P6MFVT


Regards,
Lars

--
Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG N?rnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
New resource agents common/core provider name? [ In reply to ]
On 2011-03-21T16:13:14, Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb at novell.com> wrote:

To summarize the current results:

- "clusterlabs" is the most popular first choice with 7 votes
- "core" is close with 6
- "planet-ha" with 3
- "linux-ha" with 2
- "opencf" with 1


Regards,
Lars

--
Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG N?rnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde

1 2  View All