On 11/30/2011 04:09 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
>> How easy is QMF to consume from a software development perspective?
>> Would it be
>> easy for someone to write a virsh-like tool against a QMF-based vdsm
>> API? Would
>> such a tool be able to run on multiple Linux distributions?
>
> it is supposed
On 11/30/2011 10:52 AM, Adam Litke wrote:
>> I'm not sure how hard it is technically. But for ISV's, I can tell
>> > you that almost nobody has experience with it.
> That is not a good sign. Certainly there must be some sort of standardized
> and
> well understood API transport that we can use.
On 11/30/2011 11:00 PM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
> On 11/30/2011 10:52 AM, Adam Litke wrote:
>>> I'm not sure how hard it is technically. But for ISV's, I can tell
you that almost nobody has experience with it.
>> That is not a good sign. Certainly there must be some sort of standardized
>> an
On 11/29/2011 06:29 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
> After discussing MOM / VDSM integration at length, two different strategies
> have
> emerged. I will call them Plan A and Plan B:
>
> Plan A: MOM integration at the OS/Packaging level
> Plan B: MOM integration as a new VDSM thread
I think a form of pla
Hi all,
On the agenda
1. I would like to finalize details about the API (QMF/REST-API)
2. ???
Regards,
Ayal.
___
vdsm-devel mailing list
vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 12:37:00AM +0100, Geert Jansen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> i think this makes sense, but i'm not a VDSM expert. I did want to
> point out one other point, below:
>
> On 11/30/2011 11:40 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
> >Recently we've had some very productive discussions concerning the VDSM A
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:32:55PM -0500, Itamar Heim wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Adam Litke [mailto:a...@us.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 0:41 AM
> > To: vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org; engine-de...@ovirt.org
> > Cc: Daniel P. Berrange; Chris Wright; D
On 12/01/2011 07:35 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
> A single-node (or standalone VDSM deployment) is a very important use case.
> Many people are coming into the oVirt community from different perspectives.
> The strength of the ecosystem depends, in part, on the ability of oVirt
> components to be combi
On Thu 01 Dec 2011 11:07:18 AM EST, Ayal Baron wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On the agenda
> 1. I would like to finalize details about the API (QMF/REST-API)
> 2. ???
I can do an overview of all the stuff I'm trying to push in (image
manipulator\ connection monitor)
>
>
> Regards,
> Ayal.
> ___
On 11/30/2011 05:40 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
> Recently we've had some very productive discussions concerning the VDSM API.
> I
> want to attempt to refocus the discussion around an emerging proposal and see
> if
> we can agree on a sensible path forward.
>
> Based on the discussion, I have identif
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 02:02:27AM -0500, Ayal Baron wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Adam Litke [mailto:a...@us.ibm.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 0:41 AM
> > > To: vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org; engine-de...@ovirt
On 12/01/2011 01:42 PM, Geert Jansen wrote:
>
> On 12/01/2011 07:35 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
>
>> A single-node (or standalone VDSM deployment) is a very important use
>> case.
>> Many people are coming into the oVirt community from different
>> perspectives.
>> The strength of the ecosystem depends
* Geert Jansen [2011-11-30 17:38]:
> Hi,
>
> i think this makes sense, but i'm not a VDSM expert. I did want to point
> out one other point, below:
>
> On 11/30/2011 11:40 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
> > Recently we've had some very productive discussions concerning the VDSM
> > API. I
> > want to
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 03:36:04PM -0600, Adam Litke wrote:
>
> Hopefully monitorCommand will not be too bad, since vdsm should be asking
> libvirt for the VM details when they are needed. Of course we'll need to be
> testing to make sure we aren't keeping state around. Also, I would expect
> mo
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 07:21:08PM +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 01:11:18PM -0600, Adam Litke wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 05:44:23PM +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:18:42AM -0600, Adam Litke wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 11:05:55AM +0200, Dor Laor wrote:
> On 11/29/2011 06:29 PM, Adam Litke wrote:
> > After discussing MOM / VDSM integration at length, two different strategies
> > have
> > emerged. I will call them Plan A and Plan B:
> >
> > Plan A: MOM integration at the OS/Packaging level
I want to suggest a different way of handling constants.py and config.py
the current way is clumsy and makes making convoluted code easy.
GLOBAL VARIABLES ARE BAD. It's not something I invented. It's well
accepted that proper scoping yields better code.
The way we use those two files shows how m
Hi, all!
vdsm-logrotate kept reporting errors like "error: skipping
"/var/log/core/core.3150.1321682189.dump" because parent directory has
insecure permissions (It's world writable or writable by group which is
not "root") Set "su" directive in config file to tell logrotate which
user/group should
18 matches
Mail list logo
