On 08/04/2015 04:56 AM, Walter Niklaus wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> sorry for missing the thread where this topic was discussed.
> I can fully understand the point about Basic Information and System
> Statistics being relevant for Virtualization management as well and I
> like the idea of potentially making it part of the base framework
> because they would be very usefull for other plugins, like
> Container-Management as well.
> The interesting question is then if some of the other functions
> wouldn't make sense to be part of the basic framework as well. Debug
> reports would be a classical candidate from my point of view, but
> wouldn't some of the other functions be usefull in the base as well ?
If we're really going in that approach (putting basic features in WoK),
I agree. We would have to
discuss each existing feature and evaluate if it belongs to kimchi,
ginger or wok.
> Looking at the problem form a different angle: wouldn't it make sense
> to package and deliver the base framework with the Ginger plugin by
> default because the Host-functionality Ginger is offering would be
> usefull for the other plugins like Virtualization and Containers ?
> What I missed in my previous mail is the aspect about platform
> specific functionality. This functionality, like PPC firmware update
> or IO-device management for Linux on z should be made available as
> individual plugins.
At this moment Ginger can handle multi-arch features fairly well. For
Update does not appear when running the plug-in in an Intel computer.
The feature you mentioned,
IO-device management for Linux on Z, would be available only when
running Ginger in a Linux
for Z host.
There's absolutely nothing holding you from making a brand new plug-in
for the Z features instead
of adding them to Ginger, but it is important to know that Ginger is
designed for these scenarios.
You can even create a new UI tab in Ginger, something like 'Z
management' which would contain all Z related features. This tab would
only appear in a Linux on Z host. From the UI perspective it looks
like a brand new plug-in working together with Ginger common features in
the 'Administration' tab.
> Please let me know what you think about this option.
> On 03.08.2015 18:51, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
>> Hi Walter,
>> We've had this discussion with the community a few months ago in the
>> "[RFC] Moving some features of Host tab to Ginger"
>> And we agreed to start it by moving only Software Update,
>> Repositories and
>> Debug Reports from Kimchi to Ginger.
>> The Basic Information and System Statistics can't be taken away from
>> Kimchi because there
>> are relevant information for the creation of VMs there, such as
>> Memory Available. But I agree
>> that these information fits nicely in Ginger too.
>> One alternative (just came in my head now) is to move these "neutral"
>> to a "Basic System Info" in WoK. That way both Kimchi and Ginger
>> users can access
>> the information.
>> On 08/03/2015 12:15 PM, Walter Niklaus wrote:
>>> After separating out Kimchi as an indvidual plugin from the base
>>> framework it would be great to have a clean separation between Host-
>>> Virtualization Management functions. I'm planning to work on this topic
>>> in the next few weeks and have prepared a proposal of the
>>> Plugin functionality:
>>> - Ginger:
>>> - Basic Information
>>> - System Statistics
>>> - Network (Host NICs)
>>> - Storage/SAN (Host Storage)
>>> - User Management
>>> - Configuration Backup
>>> - Software Updates
>>> - Repositories
>>> - Debug Reports
>>> - PPC related functions: Firmware Update & Power Management
>>> - Kimchi:
>>> - Templates
>>> - Guests
>>> - Networks (virtual)
>>> - Storage (Pools for VMs)
>>> Since there are plans to restructure the UI for one of the next
>>> releases, I'm proposing to do only some minimal investments in
>>> reflecting this new finctionsplit. Therefore I'm proposing to make the
>>> Host tab as the one and only Tab for Ginger and move everything from
>>> Administration Tab into the Host Tab. This would be just an
>>> intermediate solution till we implement the new UI design. Please see
>>> the attached PDF.
>>> Thanks in advance for your feedback.
>>> Kimchi-devel mailing list
>> Kimchi-devel mailing list
On 07/08/2015 03:33, Suresh Babu14 wrote:
> Hi Aline,
> Current WOK page has "Help" button, which renders blank page. If you
> think we don't need help page for WOK, i suggest we shouldn't have
> Help button. Or going with your line ""I think it is hard to us to
> point the user to any specific plugin like kimchi or ginger, as anyone
> can develop a wok plugin and host anywhere" -- we can always modify
> the help message to exclude what plugins can be installed.
I've just replied to other email in this thread about it.
There was a logic to do not display the help when the plugin does not
provide it. I am not sure it was moved to wok or not.
We need to check and do the appropriated fixes.
On 06/08/2015 17:49, Harshal Patil wrote:
> Cool, my question is when do you think we should have a git repo for
> 'wok' (in kimchi-project org)?
When we get it wok and Kimchi as plugin stable enough to be officially
The idea is to have it by end of Sept, ie, 2 months from now on. And
then the new repository and all proper configuration to make Kimchi and
Ginger as submodules will be done and announced.
> IMHO, we should have it right now and then start working on that repo
> instead of current one.
> ----- Original message -----
> From: Aline Manera <alinefm(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> To: Harshal Patil/India/IBM@IBMIN, kimchi-devel(a)ovirt.org
> Subject: Re: [Kimchi-devel] Should wok be a fork of kimchi?
> Date: Fri, Aug 7, 2015 1:25 AM
> Hi Harshal,
> As long as we complete the transition to wok framework, ie, make
> wok framework and Kimchi as plugin stable, 'wok' will be a new git
> repository into kimchi-project organization on github. And Kimchi
> and Ginger will be loaded as submodules.
> Aline Manera
> On 06/08/2015 16:46, Harshal Patil wrote:
>> We are seeing lately how wok is positioned so differently than
>> kimchi is in many aspects. There are talks about changing UI
>> frameworks (bootstrap), and then having separate plugins (kimchi,
>> ginger). Wok is not going to be anything like the way kimchi is
>> today. It even has different name ('wok' instead of kimchi <next
>> Considering that should have wok development in a forked (from
>> existing kimchi) repo, having it as a branch of kimchi master
>> fails to make any sense to me.
>> Kimchi-devel mailing list
>> Kimchi-devel(a)ovirt.org <mailto:Kimchifirstname.lastname@example.org>