On 2014-04-22 11:06, Colin Guthrie wrote: > Hiya, > > 'Twas brillig, and David Henningsson at 22/04/14 09:41 did gyre and gimble: >> On 2014-04-17 12:41, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: >>> On Fri, 2014-04-04 at 15:50 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: >>>> On 04/04/2014 11:31 AM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: >>>>> I'm heading towards "a generic solution to our current routing issues", >>>>> but that solution will depend on Murphy, which will provide the >>>>> configurability and the default routing rules. In my opinion, >>>>> implementing another solution with good configurability and >>>>> better-than-current default routing without Murphy should be >>>>> implemented >>>>> by someone else, if a non-Murphy-based solution is desired. >>>> >>>> (Just summing up what we discussed on IRC) >>>> >>>> So the result from all this work is that normal desktop users will get >>>> nothing, except an API and quite some infrastructure to maintain. >>>> >>>>> If I understood correctly, you wish that I'd implement a full generic >>>>> non-Murphy-based solution before merging the node infrastructure, but >>>>> it's unclear to me whether that wish is a minimum requirement or not, >>>>> and if it's not, what's the minimum requirement? >>>> >>>> I'm not sure what to answer to this question right now. I'd like to hear >>>> what others have to say as well. >>> >>> Others were silent, so in the absence of permission from you to do >>> anything else I think I'll have to work with the assumption that I will >>> need to provide some kind of configurable non-Murphy-based routing >>> module before the routing infrastructure can be accepted to master. >> >> Well, I'd much prefer to hear more opinions about it. It's difficult for >> me to know as well. > > Sorry, I've been somewhat slow to comment on this. Better late than never :-) > Is there a simple summary of the hooks etc. added by the Murphy patches > that would be available to said alternative routing system? I'd like to add the question - compared to the current git master, would the routing patch set make it any easier to implement Colin's priority lists? Or would it be about the same (or even make things more complicated)? -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
