Glenn Lagasse wrote: > Hey Joe, > > * Joseph J VLcek (Joseph.Vlcek at Sun.COM) wrote: > >> If I understand correctly you describe 3 scenarios: >> >> 1- Configure VM with a set of predefined option settings. >> 2- Provide for user supplied, manifest driven VM configuration >> 3- Allow the user to specify the identifier of a pre-configured VM in >> the manifest. >> >> If I got this correct, I think from the users perspective providing 1 >> and 3 would also provide for option 2. In that, if the user desires a >> specific configuration in the VM, they can configure the VM and specify >> it in the DC manifest. >> >> This would also allow us to avoid the unwieldy support of the many VM >> options in a manifest, while at the same time provide the user with a >> mechanism to utilize VM as they need. >> > > I think you're probably right. If we implement support for 1 and 3, > then users could create their own custom configured VM and supply it via > whatever mechanism we have for 3. The question is, are we happy with > that tradeoff? > > Any other thoughts out there? > > Cheers, > > I would agree with Joe - options 1 and 3 allow us to cover both the simple and the complex case. While it would be nice to allow the user to specify VM specifics in the manifest, unless that interface is straightforward, I think they'll be happier setting up their VM first (which they already know how to do) rather than learn a new interface into their VM.
It also seems that if we can complete option 1, then expanding on those options later on would be a simpler task, and options could be added on an as-needed/as-wanted basis. -Keith Mitchell
