From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Adam C. Emerson" Subject: Re: How best to integrate dmClock QoS library into ceph codebase Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 12:00:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20170404160059.GB22266@ultraspiritum.eng.arb.redhat.com> References: <6D8EA95A-572E-4C71-A6AF-6BB8A6E8B26C@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42756 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753759AbdDDQBE (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Apr 2017 12:01:04 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BA7D3DBDF for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2017 16:01:04 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6D8EA95A-572E-4C71-A6AF-6BB8A6E8B26C@redhat.com> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "J. Eric Ivancich" Cc: The Sacred Order of the Squid Cybernetic On 04/04/2017, J. Eric Ivancich wrote: > An argument for making it a submodule is that ceph already uses submodules and ceph developers are familiar with working with (and around) them. I think this would be the overriding argument. If both submodules and subtrees have their own set of drawbacks, it seems like a bad idea for Ceph as a project to have to deal with /both/ sets of drawbacks instead of just one. -- Senior Software Engineer Red Hat Storage, Ann Arbor, MI, US IRC: Aemerson@{RedHat, OFTC} 0x80F7544B90EDBFB9 E707 86BA 0C1B 62CC 152C 7C12 80F7 544B 90ED BFB9