board-bounces@ovirt.org wrote on 09/28/2011 04:29:48 AM:
(04:19:55 PM) cctrieloff: pmyers: ping (04:19:59 PM) pmyers: pong (04:20:16 PM) cctrieloff: wanted to kick around the comments on the vote
(04:20:57 PM) cctrieloff: Based on Adams comments, as mom is also used by other projects, then those users would need to move to vdsm if c was executed. As mom already has other users I believe it may be more pragmatic to get results using (a or b) and then we can always combine the projects if all can be served from vdsm and if that simplifies things (04:21:01 PM) cctrieloff: thoughts? (04:21:11 PM) pmyers: well (04:21:18 PM) pmyers: if it has other users outside of the oVirt use case (04:21:25 PM) pmyers: then should it be in oVirt at all? :) (04:21:32 PM) pmyers: maybe yes, but I just wanted to pose the question (04:21:32 PM) cctrieloff: why not? (04:21:53 PM) cctrieloff: if it focuses to serve oVirt then I would say yes. (04:22:02 PM) pmyers: well things like libvirt and matahari don't make sense inside of oVirt community because they have too many use cases outside of oVirt (04:22:06 PM) cctrieloff: it could just be a lib that ovirt vdsm uses (04:22:07 PM) pmyers: at least that was what we discussed (04:22:27 PM) cctrieloff: that can be debated either way (04:22:31 PM) pmyers: yep (04:22:36 PM) pmyers: and that's sort of what I'm debating here (04:22:41 PM) djasa [~djasa@ip-62-245-123-239.net.upcbroadband.cz] entered the room. (04:22:44 PM) pmyers: i'm not violently opposed to MOM being a full
a bit project
(04:22:57 PM) pmyers: just wanted to raise what I saw as a possible issue (04:22:57 PM) cctrieloff: point is if someone wants to be in the community, and they add value and integrate, then I believe we should say yes (04:23:01 PM) pmyers: ok (04:23:11 PM) pmyers: so you would be open to matahari then? :) (04:23:13 PM) cctrieloff: I agree with the question (04:23:18 PM) cctrieloff: yes, I would (04:23:22 PM) pmyers: k (04:23:29 PM) cctrieloff: I think it would help matahari with visibility etc (04:23:30 PM) pmyers: we can circle back round to that question later (04:23:31 PM) pmyers: ack (04:23:38 PM) pmyers: then no objection to MOM (04:23:53 PM) pmyers: my only real concern was overhead of setting up lists and other infra (04:23:57 PM) pmyers: if in the end it would be integrated (04:24:02 PM) pmyers: if it looks like it will stay standalone (04:24:05 PM) pmyers: then those concerns are moot (04:24:06 PM) cctrieloff: ack. (04:24:41 PM) cctrieloff: personally, my guess is that it might want it's API to be integrated in vdsm and if the users come across to vdsm then they should integrate (04:24:55 PM) pmyers: yeo (04:24:59 PM) pmyers: yep that is (04:25:10 PM) cctrieloff: to me the question is does the community figure this out over time, or do we make them figure it out upfront. (04:25:19 PM) pmyers: heh (04:25:22 PM) pmyers: over time :) (04:25:30 PM) pmyers: can't make a community do anything by fiat (04:25:35 PM) cctrieloff: ack (04:25:57 PM) cctrieloff: ok, based on this interaction, I'm going to vote +1. (04:26:17 PM) cctrieloff: do you mind if I post the IRC log to the list? (04:26:36 PM) pmyers: nope, go ahead (04:26:39 PM) cctrieloff: thx
I think I'd err on adding a sub-project even if later on closer examination it was found to be completely consumed.. re: Matahari.. Not sure why it shouldn't be considered part of oVirt.. at least from directions I had heard/seen, seemed there was good synergy.. It didn't seem that it was JUST about oVirt, but that doesn't matter, as long as it does provide value to the KVM managed ecosystem. That should be the main criteria... Cheers, Frank ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frank Novak ( 诺帆 nuò、fān ) STSM, SCEM Open Hypervisor IBM Linux Technology Center -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------