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 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 identified the following requirements that > a new API for vdsm should have: > > 1.) Single API that can be consumed by ovirt-engine and ISVs > - We don't want to maintain multiple parallel APIs > - To develop a vendor ecosystem, we must have a robust external API to > vdsm I have doubts around how useful the VDSM API will be for creating an ecosystem. If you look at most virtualization ISVs today, they want to integrate with a multi-node API and not a single-node API. The only use case that i know where integrating with a single node API is requested is when you're basically creating a virtualization management platform like oVirt itself. [Since we haven't met before, a brief intro... I have been responsible at Red Hat for buiding our virtualization ecosystem for the past year or so.] Regards, Geert _______________________________________________ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
