Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Oopps.. that's not what I meant to convey :) We're not going to collapse them into a single one -- we're just going to change the setup.py that is currently in the tree to be a real setup.py so that the normal commands work (i.e. bdist_egg, etc). For now this will bring in all of Quantum which is

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Brad, I noticed from and the associated blueprint that you are now planning to collapse the separate setup_*.py files into a single setup.py. Does this mean you've completely given up on structuring quantum into separately packaged common, clie

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Hey Robert, Good catch! I'll file a bug to move the extensions to the cisco plugin directory. Thanks, Brad On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Robert Kukura wrote: > On 11/28/2011 07:07 PM, Brad Hall wrote: >> >> OK, the changes are in.  The directory tree is now back to the old >> structure whic

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

On 11/28/2011 07:07 PM, Brad Hall wrote: OK, the changes are in. The directory tree is now back to the old structure which should make life easier for the distros for packaging. Thanks,Brad On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Brad Hall wrote: Thanks for the feedback.. Here is a review for the cha

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

OK, the changes are in.  The directory tree is now back to the old structure which should make life easier for the distros for packaging. Thanks,Brad On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Brad Hall wrote: > Thanks for the feedback.. Here is a review for the changes: > https://review.openstack.org/#chan

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Thanks! I'll apply the patch and fix the issues you pointed out and then resubmit the patchset. -Brad On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 7:47 AM, ghe. rivero wrote: > Just one last comment: I don't know if it's packaging or python stuff to do, > but, plugins don't load due to a missing __init__.py file in

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Just one last comment: I don't know if it's packaging or python stuff to do, but, plugins don't load due to a missing __init__.py file in the plugins dir (/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/quantum/plugins) With an empty one is enough. Ghe Rivero PD- is it possible to do a review of a review? or ho

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Everything looks fine so far, just a couple of comments: 1.- There is a setup.py missing for the sample plugin (it existed before). Nothing necessary. 2.- Now, having all setupX.py at the same dir, if you build and install one, and then, build/install a second one, without cleaning the first, the

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Wow! That was quick! I'll take a look this morning. Ghe Rivero On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Brad Hall wrote: > Thanks for the feedback.. Here is a review for the changes: > https://review.openstack.org/#change,1886 > > Thanks, > Brad > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Chris Wright wrote

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Thanks for the feedback.. Here is a review for the changes: https://review.openstack.org/#change,1886 Thanks, Brad On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Chris Wright wrote: > * Dan Wendlandt (d...@nicira.com) wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:03 PM, ghe. rivero wrote: >> > Absolutly. I only hope t

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

* Dan Wendlandt (d...@nicira.com) wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:03 PM, ghe. rivero wrote: > > Absolutly. I only hope that the change happens not so close to the final > > essex release. Anyway, if you need a hand, I'm willing to help. > > I think this is key. Let's really focus on getting t

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:03 PM, ghe. rivero wrote: > > > > Absolutly. I only hope that the change happens not so close to the final > essex release. Anyway, if you need a hand, I'm willing to help. > I think this is key. Let's really focus on getting these changes in for essex-2 so people can h

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Hi everyone On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Chris Wright wrote: > * Brad Hall (b...@nicira.com) wrote: > > As for the directory structure, I agree that the current layout is > > cumbersome. The reason it was done was for ease of packaging; but if > > the distros are going to package it using

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

* Brad Hall (b...@nicira.com) wrote: > As for the directory structure, I agree that the current layout is > cumbersome. The reason it was done was for ease of packaging; but if > the distros are going to package it using spec/deb files anyways then > it isn't necessary. What I was thinking is to

Re: [Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Hi Chris, Glad to see the packaging is in place for the diablo Quantum release -- that's fantastic. As for the directory structure, I agree that the current layout is cumbersome. The reason it was done was for ease of packaging; but if the distros are going to package it using spec/deb files any

[Netstack] quantum tree layout and packaging

Hey Brad, Dan mentioned you are thinking of making some tree layout changes. Would be great to hear what your thoughts are, since distros may need to adjust their packaging to adapt for essex. The current essex layout seems cumbersome to me, but perhaps there's some python-centric reasoning for i