From markmc at redhat.com Fri Jan 7 15:35:44 2011 From: markmc at redhat.com (Mark McLoughlin) Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 15:35:44 +0000 Subject: [Ovirt-devel] roadmap & development In-Reply-To: <5E35C27E-1B1A-4464-AE31-A9DE5882FCBF@mbl.edu> References: <5E35C27E-1B1A-4464-AE31-A9DE5882FCBF@mbl.edu> Message-ID: <1294414544.2922.121.camel@blaa> Hey, I think Anthony has a good point. There was initially a lot of buzz and excitement around oVirt but, if someone came upon the project now, they'd be forgiven for wondering why things have gone so quiet. It's probably obvious to anyone following the project closely what has happened - most of the developers on the project were from Red Hat and when Red Hat acquired Qumranet in September 2008, Red Hat's focus started moving towards releasing what eventually became RHEV. Since ovirt-node is the upstream of RHEV-H and ovirt-server isn't a part of RHEV, Red Hat folks gradually stopped working on ovirt-server. This happened quietly and without any fuss since I guess everyone hoped the project would continue to flourish. This could have been handled better. Despite the best efforts of Arthur, Michel, Nicolas and Simon ovirt-server has gone very quiet and there hasn't been a new release since May. You're probably asking what this has to do with me? Well, I've been working on RHEV-M this past year (e.g. see rhevm-api[1]) and hope that RHEV-M will be open-sourced without too much more delay. An idea that has occurred to a few of us is that this could be a great opportunity to re-invigorate and re-launch the oVirt project. That would mean adding the RHEV-M codebase to oVirt (as ovirt-manager, perhaps) and kick-starting oVirt again. The tricky part of this is what would happen the ovirt-server codebase. Would it end up just being deprecated, or some people might be interested in re-factoring it into a frontend UI talking to ovirt-manager. I don't know. This is just an idea. Maybe it's a terrible one. Perhaps folks here feel they could continue to build upon ovirt-server and make oVirt a kick-ass community again? I only ever watched oVirt from the sidelines and I thought it rocked. I really believe that we could make oVirt rock again with this idea. Thoughts? Thanks, Mark. [1] - https://fedorahosted.org/rhevm-api On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 09:22 -0500, Anthony Goddard wrote: > Hi there, > I'm very interested in oVirt as a management interface for a VM setup > we're building, however it seems as though there isn't much info on > the product roadmap or active development. I'm wondering if anyone > could point me to more information on the roadmap or commit activity > on the project? > > > Regards, > Anthony > _______________________________________________ > Ovirt-devel mailing list > Ovirt-devel at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ovirt-devel From dpierce at redhat.com Fri Jan 7 18:03:27 2011 From: dpierce at redhat.com (Darryl L. Pierce) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 13:03:27 -0500 Subject: [Ovirt-devel] roadmap & development In-Reply-To: <1294414544.2922.121.camel@blaa> References: <5E35C27E-1B1A-4464-AE31-A9DE5882FCBF@mbl.edu> <1294414544.2922.121.camel@blaa> Message-ID: <20110107180327.GC3341@mcpierce-laptop.redhat.com> On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 03:35:44PM +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > I think Anthony has a good point. There was initially a lot of buzz and > excitement around oVirt but, if someone came upon the project now, > they'd be forgiven for wondering why things have gone so quiet. > > It's probably obvious to anyone following the project closely what has > happened - most of the developers on the project were from Red Hat and > when Red Hat acquired Qumranet in September 2008, Red Hat's focus > started moving towards releasing what eventually became RHEV. > > Since ovirt-node is the upstream of RHEV-H and ovirt-server isn't a part > of RHEV, Red Hat folks gradually stopped working on ovirt-server. This > happened quietly and without any fuss since I guess everyone hoped the > project would continue to flourish. This could have been handled better. > > Despite the best efforts of Arthur, Michel, Nicolas and Simon > ovirt-server has gone very quiet and there hasn't been a new release > since May. > > You're probably asking what this has to do with me? Well, I've been > working on RHEV-M this past year (e.g. see rhevm-api[1]) and hope that > RHEV-M will be open-sourced without too much more delay. > > An idea that has occurred to a few of us is that this could be a great > opportunity to re-invigorate and re-launch the oVirt project. That would > mean adding the RHEV-M codebase to oVirt (as ovirt-manager, perhaps) and > kick-starting oVirt again. I think this would be an outstanding path to take. I've kept in touch with several users of oVirt server and know that the lot of them are very interested in what we're doing behind the scenes. > The tricky part of this is what would happen the ovirt-server codebase. > Would it end up just being deprecated, or some people might be > interested in re-factoring it into a frontend UI talking to > ovirt-manager. I don't know. > > This is just an idea. Maybe it's a terrible one. Perhaps folks here feel > they could continue to build upon ovirt-server and make oVirt a kick-ass > community again? > > I only ever watched oVirt from the sidelines and I thought it rocked. I > really believe that we could make oVirt rock again with this idea. > > Thoughts? I agree that we could pump new life into the project by open sourcing what we have in RHEVM and providing a clean, documented API to the oVirt server project. Several of the users on upstream oVirt are adept RoR programmers who would jump at the chance to work on this, and they have communicated that to me, that they hope whatever we're doing will get opened up soon for them to use. -- Darryl L. Pierce, Sr. Software Engineer @ Red Hat, Inc. Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available URL: From javilinux at gmail.com Fri Jan 7 18:22:39 2011 From: javilinux at gmail.com (Javier Ramirez Molina) Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 19:22:39 +0100 Subject: [Ovirt-devel] roadmap & development In-Reply-To: <1294414544.2922.121.camel@blaa> References: <5E35C27E-1B1A-4464-AE31-A9DE5882FCBF@mbl.edu> <1294414544.2922.121.camel@blaa> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > Hey, > > I think Anthony has a good point. There was initially a lot of buzz and > excitement around oVirt but, if someone came upon the project now, > they'd be forgiven for wondering why things have gone so quiet. > > It's probably obvious to anyone following the project closely what has > happened - most of the developers on the project were from Red Hat and > when Red Hat acquired Qumranet in September 2008, Red Hat's focus > started moving towards releasing what eventually became RHEV. > > Since ovirt-node is the upstream of RHEV-H and ovirt-server isn't a part > of RHEV, Red Hat folks gradually stopped working on ovirt-server. This > happened quietly and without any fuss since I guess everyone hoped the > project would continue to flourish. This could have been handled better. > > Despite the best efforts of Arthur, Michel, Nicolas and Simon > ovirt-server has gone very quiet and there hasn't been a new release > since May. > > You're probably asking what this has to do with me? Well, I've been > working on RHEV-M this past year (e.g. see rhevm-api[1]) and hope that > RHEV-M will be open-sourced without too much more delay. > > An idea that has occurred to a few of us is that this could be a great > opportunity to re-invigorate and re-launch the oVirt project. That would > mean adding the RHEV-M codebase to oVirt (as ovirt-manager, perhaps) and > kick-starting oVirt again. > As a non developer, I really love that idea. I like RHEV and I completely understand the circumstances and the reasons why is not completely open source, but I think it should exists an upstream project that cope not only rhev-h but also rhev-m. > The tricky part of this is what would happen the ovirt-server codebase. > Would it end up just being deprecated, or some people might be > interested in re-factoring it into a frontend UI talking to > ovirt-manager. I don't know. > > This is just an idea. Maybe it's a terrible one. Perhaps folks here feel > they could continue to build upon ovirt-server and make oVirt a kick-ass > community again? > > I only ever watched oVirt from the sidelines and I thought it rocked. I > really believe that we could make oVirt rock again with this idea. > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > Mark. > > [1] - https://fedorahosted.org/rhevm-api > > > On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 09:22 -0500, Anthony Goddard wrote: >> Hi there, >> I'm very interested in oVirt as a management interface for a VM setup >> we're building, however it seems as though there isn't much info on >> the product roadmap or active development. I'm wondering if anyone >> could point me to more information on the roadmap or commit activity >> on the project? >> >> >> Regards, >> Anthony >> _______________________________________________ >> Ovirt-devel mailing list >> Ovirt-devel at redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ovirt-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ovirt-devel mailing list > Ovirt-devel at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ovirt-devel > From pmyers at redhat.com Fri Jan 7 18:29:32 2011 From: pmyers at redhat.com (Perry Myers) Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 13:29:32 -0500 Subject: [Ovirt-devel] roadmap & development In-Reply-To: <20110107180327.GC3341@mcpierce-laptop.redhat.com> References: <5E35C27E-1B1A-4464-AE31-A9DE5882FCBF@mbl.edu> <1294414544.2922.121.camel@blaa> <20110107180327.GC3341@mcpierce-laptop.redhat.com> Message-ID: <4D275B8C.8060402@redhat.com> On 01/07/2011 01:03 PM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 03:35:44PM +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote: >> I think Anthony has a good point. There was initially a lot of buzz and >> excitement around oVirt but, if someone came upon the project now, >> they'd be forgiven for wondering why things have gone so quiet. >> >> It's probably obvious to anyone following the project closely what has >> happened - most of the developers on the project were from Red Hat and >> when Red Hat acquired Qumranet in September 2008, Red Hat's focus >> started moving towards releasing what eventually became RHEV. >> >> Since ovirt-node is the upstream of RHEV-H and ovirt-server isn't a part >> of RHEV, Red Hat folks gradually stopped working on ovirt-server. This >> happened quietly and without any fuss since I guess everyone hoped the >> project would continue to flourish. This could have been handled better. >> >> Despite the best efforts of Arthur, Michel, Nicolas and Simon >> ovirt-server has gone very quiet and there hasn't been a new release >> since May. >> >> You're probably asking what this has to do with me? Well, I've been >> working on RHEV-M this past year (e.g. see rhevm-api[1]) and hope that >> RHEV-M will be open-sourced without too much more delay. >> >> An idea that has occurred to a few of us is that this could be a great >> opportunity to re-invigorate and re-launch the oVirt project. That would >> mean adding the RHEV-M codebase to oVirt (as ovirt-manager, perhaps) and >> kick-starting oVirt again. > > I think this would be an outstanding path to take. I've kept in touch > with several users of oVirt server and know that the lot of them are > very interested in what we're doing behind the scenes. > >> The tricky part of this is what would happen the ovirt-server codebase. >> Would it end up just being deprecated, or some people might be >> interested in re-factoring it into a frontend UI talking to >> ovirt-manager. I don't know. >> >> This is just an idea. Maybe it's a terrible one. Perhaps folks here feel >> they could continue to build upon ovirt-server and make oVirt a kick-ass >> community again? >> >> I only ever watched oVirt from the sidelines and I thought it rocked. I >> really believe that we could make oVirt rock again with this idea. >> >> Thoughts? > > I agree that we could pump new life into the project by open sourcing > what we have in RHEVM and providing a clean, documented API to the > oVirt server project. Several of the users on upstream oVirt are adept > RoR programmers who would jump at the chance to work on this, and they > have communicated that to me, that they hope whatever we're doing will > get opened up soon for them to use. Ack on everything above. I think this would be a good path forward, and hope that the other folks interested in oVirt Server upstream will be similarly interested and willing to help out! Thanks, Perry From xner at sestory.net Fri Jan 28 08:47:44 2011 From: xner at sestory.net (=?ks_c_5601-1987?B?wMzA57+1?=) Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:47:44 +0900 Subject: [Ovirt-devel] help.... Ovirt node-imge build error Message-ID: <002401cbbec8$0a62e0e0$1f28a2a0$@net> Hi Ovirt node image build problem? Node image build my system OS Fedora core 14. I am have a question about installation process of oVirt project. Install DOC : https://fedorahosted.org/ovirt/wiki/Build But node-image build error? [root at Ovirt-T node]# ./autobuild.sh Running oVirt Node Autobuild test -f Makefile && make -k distclean || : OVIRT_CACHE_DIR=${AUTOBUILD_SOURCE_ROOT}/../ovirt-cache OVIRT_LOCAL_REPO=file://${AUTOBUILD_PACKAGE_ROOT}/rpm/RPMS ./autogen.sh --prefix=$AUTOBUILD_INSTALL_ROOT checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c checking whether build environment is sane... yes checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p checking for gawk... gawk checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes checking how to create a pax tar archive... gnutar checking for gcc... gcc checking whether the C compiler works... yes checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out checking for suffix of executables... checking whether we are cross compiling... no checking for suffix of object files... o checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed checking for style of include used by make... GNU checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3 checking for ksflatten... no configure: error: Missing python kickstart support. make make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found. Stop. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From v-defender at ukr.net Fri Jan 28 09:02:01 2011 From: v-defender at ukr.net (Ivan A.Shaposhnikov) Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 11:02:01 +0200 Subject: [Ovirt-devel] help.... Ovirt node-imge build error In-Reply-To: <002401cbbec8$0a62e0e0$1f28a2a0$@net> References: <002401cbbec8$0a62e0e0$1f28a2a0$@net> Message-ID: <4D428609.8040605@ukr.net> 28.01.2011 10:47, ??? ?????: > python kickstart you need to install pykickstart yum install pykickstart will hekp you From jboggs at redhat.com Fri Jan 28 14:21:58 2011 From: jboggs at redhat.com (Joey Boggs) Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 09:21:58 -0500 Subject: [Ovirt-devel] help.... Ovirt node-imge build error In-Reply-To: <4D428609.8040605@ukr.net> References: <002401cbbec8$0a62e0e0$1f28a2a0$@net> <4D428609.8040605@ukr.net> Message-ID: <4D42D106.2010209@redhat.com> On 01/28/2011 04:02 AM, Ivan A.Shaposhnikov wrote: > 28.01.2011 10:47, ??? ?????: >> python kickstart > you need to install pykickstart > > yum install pykickstart will hekp you > > _______________________________________________ > Ovirt-devel mailing list > Ovirt-devel at redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ovirt-devel You will probably need to install libvirt-devel as well to build. I ran into this after reloading my laptop with Fedora 14.