VARIANT_ID usage - with our without oVirt version?
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-$BRANCH", i.e. "ovirt-node-master" or "ovirt-node-3.6". I'd like to question if we should include the oVirt version in the ID, or if we should just use "ovirt-node" without the version.
From my POV the variant is not depending on a specific version, that is why I'd like to discuss it.
The oVirt version can still be retieved like on any other host i.e. using rpm or maybe some file(?). - fabian -- [0] https://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-release.git;a=blob;f=ovirt-release-m... [1] http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.html
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Fabian Deutsch <fdeutsch@redhat.com> wrote:
Hey,
we've now merged a patch [0] to use and populate the VARIANT and VARIANT_ID fields on Node.
Currently the value is something like "ovirt-node-$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.
+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.
- fabian
-- [0] https://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-release.git;a=blob;f=ovirt-release-m... [1] http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.html
-- Regards, Moti
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Moti Asayag <masayag@redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Fabian Deutsch <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-$BRANCH", i.e. "ovirt-node-master" or "ovirt-node-3.6".
I'd like to question if we should include the oVirt version in the ID, or if we should just use "ovirt-node" without the version.
From my POV the variant is not depending on a specific version, that is why I'd like to discuss it.
+1 I agree the variant-id should not be a version specific. It should only describe the flavour of the host. I don't see why the engine should be aware of the specific version of it, especially since we'd like to have a unified process for all host types and furthermore for the same host type of different versions.
The oVirt version can still be retieved like on any other host i.e. using rpm or maybe some file(?).
Resolving the supported version of the hypervisor should be done the same way as for any host by monitoring the capabilities as reported by VDSM.
Perfect, that all makes sense to me as well. - fabian -- Fabian Deutsch <fdeutsch@redhat.com> RHEV Hypervisor Red Hat
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050306080607050408010004 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/14/2016 08:26 AM, Moti Asayag wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Fabian Deutsch <fdeutsch@redhat.com <mailto:fdeutsch@redhat.com>> wrote:
Hey,
we've now merged a patch [0] to use and populate the VARIANT and VARIANT_ID fields on Node.
Currently the value is something like "ovirt-node-$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-release-m... [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=ovirt-release-m..." rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://gerrit.ovirt.org/gitweb?p=ovirt-release.git;a=blob;f=ovirt-release-master/ovirt-release-master.spec.in;h=8690d39402221acac402a6f2f0c485571ad838fa;hb=HEAD#l140</a><br> [1] <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.html</a><br> </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--
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Douglas Schilling Landgraf <dougsland@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@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
participants (3)
-
Douglas Schilling Landgraf -
Fabian Deutsch -
Moti Asayag