Just picking the latest mail on this thread. >> I don't see why we would add this by default, the VM will function >> without is (unlike storage) and we don't add ovirt-guest-agent and >> other virt vendor's agents by default.
> We do, in fact, include the SPICE agent stuff by default now. (Which I > like because it means copy/paste out of Fedora KVMs always works, but I > never claimed not to be a hypocrite :>) I think there are opinions in favor as well as against including open-vm-tools to core group. However, I'm not sure if there is a convincing explanation for following issues with conditional install of open-vm-tools: 1. Given that DVD image will not have open-vm-tools, installing these by default inside a VM will not be possible when VM is not connected to network or VM is running behind a proxy. 2. All the usecases where install environment is not the same as execution environment (including P2V) will have poor install experience. 3. Installer (Anaconda) will have to be modified specifically for each virtualization solution. Given that open-vm-tools is not a large package and is a no-op on physical, what are the real obstacles in putting it in core? Or, in other words, what would it take to put it in core group? If it is absolute no, I would proceed with the Anaconda patch if there is a good explanation/alternative to the 3 issues I have listed above. Thanks, Ravindra -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
