----- "Ken McDonell" <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ...
> As to the packaging of the import tools, I've read the later mail
> exchange between Mark and Nathan and suggest we have just one
> package, possibly pcp-import, that includes _all_ of the import tools,
> a pmimport wrapper if that is needed (unsure of this as yet), and
> dependencies for _all_ of the tools ... some will be Perl modules
> from CPAN, some may be binary modules like sysstat ... remember
> some of the tools will be in Perl, but some might be in C.
>
> This avoids polluting other PCP packages with unusual dependencies,
> at
> the cost of getting all the prereqs satisfied if you want to install
> the
> pcp-import package. And it prevents packages multiplying like
> rabbits.
I think this would be OK - having a "core" import package for the
majority of things, with dependencies on not-too-outlandish things
(like Perl spreadsheet & XML modules). I still think we will end
up with the need for specialist import packages outside of this -
it just wont be workable for something to depend on, say, Oracle
and Sybase, and SQLServer libraries, for example - I think people
will rightly cry-foul at that.
The hybrid system we now have for PMDAs - where "core" PMDAs with
not-too-exotic dependencies live in core PCP, and things like
infiniband and cluster have moved out to their own packages, seems
like the right approach here too.
cheers.
--
Nathan
|