Hi Philipp,
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 11:54:52AM +0200, Philipp Rudo wrote:
Hi Coiby,
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 15:31:27 +0800 Coiby Xu coxu@redhat.com wrote:
Related: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121912
Now there is a growing user base to use the kexec reboot and it's desirable to make the kexec-tools package more modular.
This patch splits current kexec-tools into two sub-packages kexec-tools and kdump-tools. Now kexec-tools merely provides /usr/sbin/kexec and the remaining features go into kdump-tools.
all in all I'm in favor for this change. But for me simply splitting kexec-tools in a separate sub package is just a half-baked solution. When you look at the current kexec-tools you see that it consists of four different projects. There's upstream kexec-tools, makedumpfile and eppic as well as our Fedora tooling. The 'clean' solution would be to move each project into it's own package. Ideally each having it's own repo which would allow us to move to a source-git based work flow.
Anyway, just my 2 ct's.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Yes, one potential benefit is we can upgrade kexec-tools, makedumpfile and eppic alone if each package has it's own repo. I haven't decided to do that is 1) currently only users request the upstream kexec-tools to be split out and the remaining things like makedumpfile are only for kdump; 2) I don't how much work I need to create four standalone packages for example I don't what procedure I need to go through to apply for a new package. Could you list other known benefits of "moving to a source-git based workflow" so we make a decision?