On 07/16/2014 08:15 PM, Eric Windisch wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Roman Bogorodskiy > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Eric Windisch wrote: > > > This thread highlights more deeply the problems for the FreeBSD folks. > > First, I still disagree with the recommendation that they > contribute to > > libvirt. It's a classic example of creating two or more problems > from one. > > Once they have support in libvirt, how long before their code is in a > > version of libvirt acceptable to Nova? When they hit edge-cases or > bugs, > > requiring changes in libvirt, how long before those fixes are > accepted by > > Nova? > > Could you please elaborate why you disagree on the contributing patches > to libvirt approach and what the alternative approach do you propose? > > > I don't necessarily disagree with contributing patches to libvirt. I > believe that the current system makes it difficult to perform quick, > iterative development. I wish to see this thread attempt to solve that > problem and reduce the barrier to getting stuff done. > > > Also, could you please elaborate on what is 'version of libvirt > acceptable to Nova'? Cannot we just say that e.g. Nova requires libvirt > X.Y to be deployed on FreeBSD? > > > This is precisely my point, that we need to support different versions > of libvirt and to test those versions. If we're going to support > different versions of libvirt on FreeBSD, Ubuntu, and RedHat - those > should be tested, possibly as third-party options. > > The primary testing path for libvirt upstream should be with the latest > stable release with a non-voting test against trunk. There might be > value in testing against a development snapshot as well, where we know > there are features we want in an unreleased version of libvirt but where > we cannot trust trunk to be stable enough for gate. > > > Anyway, speaking about FreeBSD support I assume we actually talking > about Bhyve support. I think it'd be good to break the task and > implement FreeBSD support for libvirt/Qemu first > > > I believe Sean was referencing to Bhyve support, this is how I > interpreted it.
Yes, I meant Bhyve.
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
http://dague.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
