6:17 p.m.
Hey,
we've now merged a patch [0] to use and populate the VARIANT and
VARIANT_ID fields on Node.
Currently the value is something like "ovirt-node-$BRANCH", i.e.
"ovirt-node-master" or "ovirt-node-3.6".
I'd like to question if we should include the oVirt version in the ID,
or if we should just use "ovirt-node" without the version.
From my POV the variant is not depending on a specific version, that
is why I'd like to discuss it.
The oVirt version can still be retieved like on any other host i.e.
using rpm or maybe some file(?).
- fabian
--
[0]
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-release.git;a=blob;f=ovirt-releas...
[1] http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.html
4:26 p.m.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Fabian Deutsch <fdeutsch(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hey,
we've now merged a patch [0] to use and populate the VARIANT and
VARIANT_ID fields on Node.
Currently the value is something like "ovirt-node-$BRANCH", i.e.
"ovirt-node-master" or "ovirt-node-3.6".
I'd like to question if we should include the oVirt version in the ID,
or if we should just use "ovirt-node" without the version.
From my POV the variant is not depending on a specific version, that
is why I'd like to discuss it.
+1
I agree the variant-id should not be a version specific. It should only
describe the flavour of the host.
I don't see why the engine should be aware of the specific version of it,
especially since we'd like to have a unified process for all host types and
furthermore for the same host type of different versions.
The oVirt version can still be retieved like on any other host i.e.
using rpm or maybe some file(?).
Resolving the supported version of the hypervisor should be done the same
way as for any host by monitoring the capabilities as reported by VDSM.
--
Regards,
Moti
7:34 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Moti Asayag <masayag(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Fabian Deutsch <fdeutsch(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> we've now merged a patch [0] to use and populate the VARIANT and
> VARIANT_ID fields on Node.
>
> Currently the value is something like "ovirt-node-$BRANCH", i.e.
> "ovirt-node-master" or "ovirt-node-3.6".
>
> I'd like to question if we should include the oVirt version in the ID,
> or if we should just use "ovirt-node" without the version.
>
> From my POV the variant is not depending on a specific version, that
> is why I'd like to discuss it.
+1
I agree the variant-id should not be a version specific. It should only
describe the flavour of the host.
I don't see why the engine should be aware of the specific version of it,
especially since we'd like to have a unified process for all host types and
furthermore for the same host type of different versions.
>
>
> The oVirt version can still be retieved like on any other host i.e.
> using rpm or maybe some file(?).
Resolving the supported version of the hypervisor should be done the same
way as for any host by monitoring the capabilities as reported by VDSM.
Perfect, that all makes sense to me as well.
- fabian
--
Fabian Deutsch <fdeutsch(a)redhat.com>
RHEV Hypervisor
Red Hat
7:50 p.m.
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050306080607050408010004
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 01/14/2016 08:26 AM, Moti Asayag wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Fabian Deutsch <fdeutsch(a)redhat.com
<mailto:fdeutsch@redhat.com>> wrote:
Hey,
we've now merged a patch [0] to use and populate the VARIANT and
VARIANT_ID fields on Node.
Currently the value is something like "ovirt-node-$BRANCH", i.e.
"ovirt-node-master" or "ovirt-node-3.6".
I'd like to question if we should include the oVirt version in the ID,
or if we should just use "ovirt-node" without the version.
From my POV the variant is not depending on a specific version, that
is why I'd like to discuss it.
My point of view is that variant_id doesn't depend of specific version,
it only shows the
'flavor' of distro and may or may not include numbers as the link [1]
showed.
One benefit to have the branding/ovirt release in variant id is that in
the new oVirt Node
it uses Cockpit which reads /etc/os-release (ID + VARIANT_ID ) to show
to the users in the login
page such data, i.e:
"CentOS oVirt Node 3.6"
Username:
Password:
+1
I agree the variant-id should not be a version specific. It should
only describe the flavour of the host.
I don't see why the engine should be aware of the specific version of
it, especially since we'd like to have a unified process for all host
types and furthermore for the same host type of different versions.
I agree that Engine shouldn't care about a specific version at all but
probably VDSM will be sending /etc/os-release to Engine for displaying
data to the users.
The oVirt version can still be retieved like on any other host i.e.
using rpm or maybe some file(?).
Resolving the supported version of the hypervisor should be done the
same way as for any host by monitoring the capabilities as reported by
VDSM.
- fabian
--
[0]
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-release.git;a=blob;f=ovirt-releas...
[1] http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.html
--
Regards,
Moti
--------------050306080607050408010004
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 01/14/2016 08:26 AM, Moti Asayag
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAE26aYfOY56znTbFEH8ucnqP9VTqeumc4zWz55LLe6k5YnMBNg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:17 PM,
Fabian Deutsch <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:fdeutsch@redhat.com"
target="_blank"><a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:fdeutsch@redhat.com">fdeutsch@redhat.com</a></a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hey,<br>
<br>
we've now merged a patch [0] to use and populate the
VARIANT and<br>
VARIANT_ID fields on Node.<br>
<br>
Currently the value is something like
"ovirt-node-$BRANCH", i.e.<br>
"ovirt-node-master" or "ovirt-node-3.6".<br>
<br>
I'd like to question if we should include the oVirt
version in the ID,<br>
or if we should just use "ovirt-node" without the
version.<br>
<br>
From my POV the variant is not depending on a specific
version, that<br>
is why I'd like to discuss it.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
My point of view is that variant_id doesn't depend of specific
version, it only shows the <br>
'flavor' of distro and may or may not include numbers as the link
[1] showed. <br>
<br>
One benefit to have the branding/ovirt release in variant id is that
in the new oVirt Node<br>
it uses Cockpit which reads /etc/os-release (ID + VARIANT_ID ) to
show to the users in the login<br>
page such data, i.e: <br>
<br>
"CentOS oVirt Node 3.6" <br>
<br>
Username: <br>
Password: <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAE26aYfOY56znTbFEH8ucnqP9VTqeumc4zWz55LLe6k5YnMBNg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
+1<br>
</div>
<div>I agree the variant-id should not be a version
specific. It should only describe the flavour of the host.<br>
</div>
<div>I don't see why the engine should be aware of the
specific version of it, especially since we'd like to have
a unified process for all host types and furthermore for
the same host type of different versions.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I agree that Engine shouldn't care about a specific version at all
but probably VDSM will be sending /etc/os-release to Engine for
displaying data to the users.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAE26aYfOY56znTbFEH8ucnqP9VTqeumc4zWz55LLe6k5YnMBNg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
The oVirt version can still be retieved like on any other
host i.e.<br>
using rpm or maybe some file(?).<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> Resolving the supported version of the hypervisor
should be done the same way as for any host by monitoring
the capabilities as reported by VDSM.<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
- fabian<br>
<br>
--<br>
[0] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-release.git;a=blob;f=o...
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">https://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-rele...
[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.htm...
rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank">http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/...
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
<div class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Regards,<br>
</div>
Moti<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------050306080607050408010004--
2:35 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Douglas Schilling Landgraf
<dougsland(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 01/14/2016 08:26 AM, Moti Asayag wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Fabian Deutsch <fdeutsch(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> we've now merged a patch [0] to use and populate the VARIANT and
> VARIANT_ID fields on Node.
>
> Currently the value is something like "ovirt-node-$BRANCH", i.e.
> "ovirt-node-master" or "ovirt-node-3.6".
>
> I'd like to question if we should include the oVirt version in the ID,
> or if we should just use "ovirt-node" without the version.
>
> From my POV the variant is not depending on a specific version, that
> is why I'd like to discuss it.
My point of view is that variant_id doesn't depend of specific version, it
only shows the
'flavor' of distro and may or may not include numbers as the link [1]
showed.
One benefit to have the branding/ovirt release in variant id is that in the
new oVirt Node
it uses Cockpit which reads /etc/os-release (ID + VARIANT_ID ) to show to
the users in the login
page such data, i.e:
"CentOS oVirt Node 3.6"
Username:
Password:
I actually see that it's completely configurable, from branding.css:
"""
#brand {
font-size: 18pt;
text-transform: uppercase;
content: "${NAME} <b>${VARIANT}</b>";
}
"""
We can easily update the file to take i.e. pretty name or something else.
+1
I agree the variant-id should not be a version specific. It should only
describe the flavour of the host.
I don't see why the engine should be aware of the specific version of it,
especially since we'd like to have a unified process for all host types and
furthermore for the same host type of different versions.
I agree that Engine shouldn't care about a specific version at all but
probably VDSM will be sending /etc/os-release to Engine for displaying data
to the users.
>
>
> The oVirt version can still be retieved like on any other host i.e.
> using rpm or maybe some file(?).
Resolving the supported version of the hypervisor should be done the same
way as for any host by monitoring the capabilities as reported by VDSM.
+1
- fabian
3234
days inactive
3236
days old
4 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Douglas Schilling Landgraf -
Fabian Deutsch -
Moti Asayag