perfsonar development work

[Jochen Reinwand <>]

On Tuesday 18 September 2007 12:23, Loukik Kudarimoti wrote:
> Jochen Reinwand wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 September 2007 12:00, Loukik Kudarimoti wrote:
> >> About the perl services, Matthias and Mark had expressed interest in
> >> moving their code to the perfSONAR svn. I think the following ones need
> >> to be investigated:
> >> * BWCTL code base
> >> * Visualisation tools (perfSONAR UI, etc)
> >
> > We (DFN Erlangen) have our own SVN here in Erlangen. All our services are
> > available from there. The source code is modular and has it's own
> > perfSONAR base. We call it perlSONAR ;-)
> >
> >
> > The directory structure is more or less incompatible with that from the
> > Java service because the technologies are completely different. Perl is
> > not Java and we are not using Apache, Tomcat, Axis or anything alike.
>
> Well, the directory structure is quite generic (src, conf, doc, etc). It
> shouldn't matter if the code is in Java or perl (thats one of the
> reasons for the new structure).

I'm not really concerned about these subdirectories. Indeed our structure 
pretty much looks the same. Of course, conf is etc.

But there is another issues: At the moment our complete software is in one 
place in the subversion. It would be possible to split it up into different 
"modules"/directories. The different modules would most likely be:

- Hades measurement infrastructure
- BWCTL measurement infrastructure
- Web visualisation
- perlSONAR base
- Hades MA
- BWCTL MP
- BWCTL MA
- OWAMP MP
- Ripe MA
...

You might have realised that this is pretty much the same as described in 
http://wiki.perfsonar.net/jra1-wiki/index.php/PerfSONAR_SVN_Structure

But we have decided to put everything in one "module" from the subversion 
point of view! For creating something like a release we plan to use file 
lists and scripts to extract everything needed for the particular release.

Why?

We have to administrate running services! Like the subversion developers are 
suggesting, we are using checkouts of "trunk" for our running systems. Bugs 
are fixed fast and directly in place. Service software "updates" are done via 
"svn update". Greater new developments and preparations of public releases 
are happening in branches.
If we would partition our software in different modules/directories, we would 
completely loose this very efficient workflow. It will cost us lots of 
manpower to do the separation and then work with this separate software 
products during daily development and administration work.

Jochen

-- 
Jochen Reinwand, DFN-Labor
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
Regionales RechenZentrum Erlangen (RRZE)
Martensstraße 1, 91058 Erlangen, Germany
Tel. +49 9131 85-28689, -28800, Fax +49 9131 302941

www.win-labor.dfn.de