[rrd-developers] [RRDCacheD] Developing RRDCacheD as separate project (was: Authentication)

[Tobias Oetiker]

(sorry for not answering sooner, I am currently hiking in the
mountains and my net access is somewhat restricted).

Hi Florian,

Today Florian Forster wrote:

> Hi Tobi, Thorsten, Kevin, and list,
>
> sorry I took my time to answer ? I wanted to sleep on this first and
> don't make any premature decisions.
>
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 04:31:02PM +0200, Tobias Oetiker wrote:
> > I love the rrdcached functionality and all the work you did on it and
> > I would not want to miss it.
> >
> > But it also makes me sad to see you angry or unhappy. So if you
> > feel that it is better for you to run your own show, I am
> > perfectly ok with you doing a fork of the cache daemon and
> > hooking it up to librrd. This will give you the freedom to
> > develop it in any direction you feel is sensible.
>
> Yes, I think separating the development would make sense and
> ultimately the open-source community will benefit from it. The
> bonding between the daemon and RRDtool would be lessened, but
> that isn't necessarily a bad thing in my opinion. RRDtool
> wouldn't have yet another binary interface to worry about and new
> releases of either project could be made whenever appropriate and
> independently from one another.

I wanted to have the rrdcached functionality in rrdtool for a long
time, and the way it is integrated now, it is fine by me.

Because rrdtool is both a front- and a backend to rrdcached I think
it is perfect to have this functionality within the rrdtool project.

> I'd like to act upon a consensus here, though. ?Forking? the
> daemon, i. e. leaving the daemon in RRDtool and developing a
> second one, is out of question for me: This would create a
> diversity nobody would benefit from.

I have the impression that you feel rather unhappy about some of my
design 'decisions' and opinions.

Because I will continue to reserve final say about goes and what
does not go in rrdtool, I suggested a fork, so that you could
develop your branch of the cached in the way you see fit.

Since we now have a binary interface to rrdtool, you could add a
fork of rrdcached to collectd and have the caching functionality at
your end ...  You could focus on the needs of collectd and develop
the cache to be a perfect match.

Don't get me wrong, I do not WANT a fork, I have no problem with
you arguing and not agreeing with me on time as I think these
discussions ultimately lead to better designs.

cheers
tobi

-- 
Tobi Oetiker, OETIKER+PARTNER AG, Aarweg 15 CH-4600 Olten, Switzerland
http://it.oetiker.ch tobi at oetiker.ch ++41 62 775 9902 / sb: -9900