> On 19 May 2020, at 14:06, Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:45 AM Michal Skrivanek > <michal.skriva...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 11 May 2020, at 14:49, Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:32 AM Nir Soffer <nsof...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 2:24 PM Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> As far as the oVirt software keeping up with Fedora, the main problem >>>>> here has always been that people aren't integrating their software into >>>>> the distribution itself. >> >> it was never a good fit for oVirt to be part of other distributions. We had >> individual packages part of Fedora in history, but there are things which >> are hard to accept (like automatically enabling of installed services, >> UIDs), and overall it’s just too complex, we’re rather a distribution than a >> simple app on top of base OS. >> > > None of those things are hard to do in Fedora. They're incredibly easy > to do. I know this because I've gone through this process already > before. > > But fine, let's assume I consider this argument valid. Then there's > still no reason not to be continually providing support for Fedora as > an add-on, as you have before.
the reason is mentioned in the original email, the lack of resources to keep actively supporting 3 different platforms. If you want to provide a helping hand and maintain Fedora infrastructure I don’t think anyone would object > >>>>> That's how everything can get tested together. And this comes back to the >>>>> old bug about fixing vdsm so that it doesn't use /rhev, but instead >>>>> something FHS-compliant (RHBZ#1369102). Once that is resolved, pretty >>>>> much the entire stack can go into Fedora. And then you benefit from the >>>>> Fedora community being able to use, test, and contribute to the oVirt >>>>> project. As it stands, why would anyone do this for you when you don't >>>>> even run on the cutting edge platform that feeds into Red Hat Enterprise >>>>> Linux? >>>> >>>> This was actually fixed a long time ago. With this commit: >>>> https://github.com/oVirt/vdsm/commit/67ba9c4bc860840d6e103fe604b16f494f60a09d >>>> >>>> You can configure a compatible vdsm that does not use /rhev. >>>> >>>> Of course it is not backward compatible, for this we need much more >>>> work to support live migration >>>> between old and new vdsm using different data-center configurations. >>>> >>> >>> It'd probably be simpler to just *change* it to an FHS-compatible path >>> going forward with EL8 and Fedora and set up a migration path there, >>> but it's a bit late for that... :( >> >> It wouldn’t. We always support live migration across several versions (now >> it’s 4.2-4.4) and it needs to stay the same or youo have to go with arcane >> code to mangle it back and forth which gets a bit ugly when you consider >> suspend/resume, snapshots, etc >> > > Erk. At some point you need to bite the bullet though... it’s about capacity as well, it’s just a matter of someone writing a code which can handle the (long) transition period Thanks, michal _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list -- devel@ovirt.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@ovirt.org Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html oVirt Code of Conduct: https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/ List Archives: https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/message/WWMZ5SYFHRP7QZMXLWCPBDFC2VADMEDX/
