On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 10:44:29AM -0400, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 08/07/2013 10:34 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > >>> That said - if we did service-ify the tool, wouldn't glance be a more > >>> appropriate place for that sort of thing? > >> > >> Possibly, though the proof of concept (and we hope our proposed > >> nova-based re-implementation) can build both glance images and cinder > >> volume backed images. > > > > I like this idea (glance seeming to make more sense conceptually). > > > > It seems like the main sticking point is whether or not it can be made > > to work for all (or most) hypervisors from outside of nova. Can we dig > > into this point a bit deeper? > > I forgot to mention here that I think targeting glance only as the > destination is fine. You can create cinder volumes from glance images > easily.
That makes sense; only producing glance images as output, avoids needlessly re-inventing functionality already available elsewhere in our APIs. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
