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

Reply via email to