libvirt or ovirt

[Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:18:50AM +0100, Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden wrote:
> In the past we've talked about running libvirt or ovirt on alterway02.
> Now that we have the server access we should really decide. I want to
> reach an agreement before the next meeting (monday 18).

I think we have sufficient input (thanks for that!) to make a short
summary of the thread.

- There seems to be a very strong preference to go for oVirt.
- Lack of knowledge setting up shouldn't be a problem because we should
  be able to get plenty of help if needed.
- Resource wise we think we have enough and if not we'll find that out
  along the way.
- Dave suggested use alterways ovirt. Possible problem there is that the
  user level API was only added in 3.2 which is still beta and I think
  Alterway is still running 3.1. This could be a project in the future
  since oVirt to oVirt migrations should be easy.

Can we conclude that we want to install oVirt on alterway02? If so
there's some questions I do have:

- Do we still want to put it on CentOS 6? It has received limited
  testing, but EL6 is (IMHO) easier to maintain than Fedora.
- Do we pick oVirt 3.1 or 3.2? Mike Burns said 3.2 would be the better
  choice because migration from 3.1 to 3.2 will not be easy. 3.1 would
  also mean running on F17, 3.2 on F18 (or maybe EL6).