Hi Sage/Laszlo Laszlo - thanks for sending the original email - I'd like to get everything as closely in-sync as possible between the three packaging sources as well. On 16/06/12 22:50, Sage Weil wrote: > I've take a closer look at these patches, and have a few questions. > > - The URL change and nss patches I've applied; they are in the ceph.git > 'debian' branch. Great! > > - Has the leveldb patch been sent upstream? Once it is committed to > the upstream git, we can update ceph to use it; that's nicer than carrying > the patch. However, I thought you needed to link against the existing > libleveldb1 package... which means we shouldn't do anything on our > side, > right? I can't see any evidence that this has been sent upstream; ideally we would be building against libleveldb1 rather than using the embedded copy - I'm not familiar with the reason that this has not happened already (if there is one). This package would also need to be reviewed for inclusion in main if that was the case. > - I'm not sure how useful it is to break mount.ceph and cephfs into a > separate ceph-fs-common package, but we can do it. Same goes for a > separate package for ceph-mds. That was originally motivated by ubuntu > not wanting the mds in main, but in the end only the libraries went in, so > it's a moot point. I'd rather hear from them what their intentions are > for 12.10 before complicating things... ceph-fs-common is in Ubuntu main; so I think the original motivation still stands IMHO. For the Ubuntu quantal cycle we still have the same primary objective as we had during 12.04; namely ensuring that Ceph RBD can be used as a block store for qemu-kvm which ties nicely into the Ubuntu OpenStack story through Cinder; In addition we will be looking at Ceph RADOS as a backend for Glance (see [0] for more details). The MIR for Ceph occurred quite late in the 12.04 cycle so we had to trim the scope to actually get it done; We will be looking at libfcgi and google-perftools this cycle for main inclusion to re-enable the components that are currently disabled in the Ubuntu packaging. > - That same patch also switched all the Architecture: lines back to > linux-any. Was that intentional? I just changed them from that last > week. I think linux-any is correct - the change you have made would exclude the PPC architecture in Ubuntu and Debian. [...] >> Ben, James, can you please share in some sentences why ceph-fuse is >> dropped in Ubuntu? Do you need it Sage? If it's feasible, you may drop >> that as well. There is an outstanding question on the 12.04 MIR as to whether this package could still be built but not promoted to main - I'll follow up with the MIR reviewer as to whether that's possible as I don't think it requires any additional build dependencies. [...] I hope that explains the Ubuntu position on Ceph and what plans we have this development cycle. I expect Clint will chip in if I have missed anything. Cheers James [0] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-q-ceph-object-integration -- James Page Ubuntu Core Developer Debian Maintainer james.page@xxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
