On Friday, 16. May 2008, Tiziano Müller wrote: > Mike Auty wrote: > > As one of the primary vmware devs, I'm not sure that vmware easily > > fits into this group based on it's closed-source nature, and the > > complex (but just about workable) module system we've put in place. I > > also wouldn't want to muddy the virtualization email address with all > > the random vmware module bugs... 5:) > > > > I'm pretty happy for the vmware group to go under the virtualization > > herd, but I'd very much like to maintain the vmware email > > alias/assignment for bugs, and I'm not sure how much we'd be able to > > integrate with the larger group. Do you think it's worthwhile vmware > > joining the umbrella or should we just stay separate? > > That's true. How about having a virtualization project which takes care > of the common part, the docs and the coordination (if any) and have > separate herds for larger "subprojects"?
I have to agree here for the Xen part. One big alias for all packages will only jam up everybody's mailbox. So we keep the existing herds (vmware, xen) and maintain common packages such as libvirt under a super-herd. Question is what happens with the packages that are not part of any herd yet (such as virtualbox, qemu)? Robert
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
