* Keith Mitchell (Keith.Mitchell at Sun.COM) wrote: >> 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.
Agreed. > 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. Yeah, I think that's viable. So, unless I hear reasons not to I'm going to go with implementing support for scenarios 1 and 3 and let 2 shake itself out as a result of that as it were. Cheers, -- Glenn
