Darren J Moffat writes:
> James Carlson wrote:
> > 6. Advisory Information
> >
> > The project team is advised to investigate a reserved name
> > space for ZFS datasets that have special meaning to the
> > operating system, and use a reserved name to contain the
> > boot environments.
> >
> > The project team is further advised to test Xen booting and
> > verify proper operation with ZFS boot.
>
> Why is it just advice rather than a TCR to make sure that xVM boot
> doesn't break ?
Two reasons:
- We didn't vote to include a TCR as part of the case, so I can't
just add it now without a new vote.
- There's no known technical change to the project that's required
to satisfy the constraint.
> TCRs need to be very specific. I think in this case that is easy. xVM
> boot must work with a ZFS root. I wouldn't expect there to be any
> public interface changes to any of the xVM delivered install/boot
> commands for this to happen (given the "magic" is well hidden today).
They do need to be specific, but it's more than that. They also need
to be changes to the specification. There's no change to the
specification of the project in this instance.
A TCR essentially rewrites part of the project specification, and then
allows the ARC members to vote on the modified specification. I don't
see where we have such an issue.
Casper.Dik at Sun.COM writes:
> You can also ask why is the remark even there? It goes without saying
> that you are not allowed to break other projects when you integrate;
> unless the ARC explicitly approves such breakage.
Certainly true. Project teams are responsible for making sure that
they don't break anything, and doing any required testing to prove
it. That's not an ARC issue -- it's a C-team review and development
process issue.
In this case, though, Tim Marsland noted during the project review
that booting Xen instances is different, and the difference may have
escaped the attention of the project team. The project team members
agreed that they should talk with him, and make sure that Xen still
works.
Our assumption at this point is that the project as specified is
complete and that no architectural changes will be required in order
to make Xen work. If that's not the case, then the project team will
need to file a new case in order to describe the required
architectural changes.
As best I can tell, the process worked exactly the way it was supposed
to work, and the right things are happening. Do you disagree?
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
