[Users] oVirt 3.4 planning

Dan Kenigsberg danken at redhat.com
Thu Oct 31 10:40:37 UTC 2013


On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:10:20PM +0200, Itamar Heim wrote:
> On 10/31/2013 11:36 AM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 07:46:57PM +0200, Itamar Heim wrote:
> >>To try and improve 3.4 planning over the wiki approach in 3.3, I've
> >>placed the items i collected on users list last time into a google
> >>doc[1]
> >>
> >>now, the main thing each item needs is a requirements owner, devel
> >>owner and a testing owner (well, devel owner is really needed to
> >>make it happen, but all are important).
> >>
> >>then we need an oVirt BZ for each, and for some a feature page.
> >>
> >>I also added columns indicating if the item will require an API
> >>design review and a GUI design review.
> >>
> >>this list is just the start of course for items from it to get
> >>ownership. i expect more items will be added as well, as long as
> >>they have owners, etc.
> >>
> >>the doc is public read-only, please request read-write access to be
> >>able to edit it.
> >>
> >>feel free to ask questions, etc.
> >
> >I'd love to add vdsm-reg phase-out to the list. It's a code-only change,
> >but it requires tracking.
> >
> >     Bug 994451 - [vdsm-reg] retire vdsm-reg
> 
> I think its clear its deprecated, but need to remain until we move
> to "4.0" when a lot of other things to be deprecated are ready.

It's still in use today, when a node registers itself to
ovirt-engine-3.3. We should replace it with a much simpler http call,
and keep vdsm-reg optional for the (very) few users who would like to
register an ovirt-node-3.4 to an engine <= 3.1.

> 
> >
> >Another one on my wishlist is per-network custom properties and hooks.
> >Having something like that would enable users do all kind of funky
> >network configurations that are currently unsupported by oVirt.
> 
> well, please add to the google doc...

Would you grant me (actually danken at gmail) write access? Or better
move the list the wiki... Editing tables in wiki syntax is no fun, but
maintaining a private acl on this google doc sounds like hell to me.



More information about the Users mailing list