[Libvir] [PATCH][RFC] libvirt ldoms support

Daniel P. Berrange berrange at redhat.com
Thu Apr 10 20:27:01 UTC 2008

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 04:19:47PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote:
> John Levon wrote:
> >>> (I know I've whined before but it would be awfully nice to have some-one
> >>> step up and update the schema: then it would be possible to insist all
> >>> such changes update the schema too.)
> >> Yes, but that doesn't excuse developing these extensions in private and then
> >> just dumping them on the list as a final solution.
> > 
> > That's hardly fair. There's a big 'RFC' in the subject and Ryan
> > explicitly said they weren't ready. Eunice has been responding to all
> > your comments. Who's been talking of "final solutions"?
> > 
> To quote Eunice:
> > I don't think the first option (to change the LDoms Manager XML
> > format to be based on the libvirt XML format) is a feasible one
> > since LDoms has been released public and some tools/applications
> > are already based on the LDom Manager's XML interfaces.
> How can that be interpreted as anything but 'final'? An RFC is not
> about implementation details, it should be about the big picture.
> Already shipping a supported product based on an XML format that
> was not discussed upstream prior is about as final as it gets, IMO.

Yes, that's exactly the point I was attempting to make. The fact that
there is a shipped LDoms 'libvirt' release is a huge problem, because
it has now diluted the value of libvirt, because it is not compatible
with the official libvirt.

|: Red Hat, Engineering, Boston   -o-   http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org  -o-  http://virt-manager.org  -o-  http://ovirt.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505  -o-  F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|

More information about the libvir-list mailing list