On 11/30/2012 04:29 AM, David Nyström wrote:
On 11/29/2012 02:54 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 06:44 -0700, Raymond Danks wrote:
Thanks for looping me in here David. The initial goal for the meta-xen
layer was in fact to encompass Xen Cloud Platform. As such, the intent
was to contain both hypervisor and user-space applications. Indeed, the
xen distribution itself includes xm/libxl; hypervisor abstraction would
be somewhat tedious in my opinion.
The layer just received commits for expanding the libvirt build to
support qemu. The commonalities and shared packaged between xen, qemu,
and kvm implementations are such that I would also agree that meta-xen
should be expanded/renamed to encompass all virtualization types; I
also
support the move to meta-virtualization.
meta-virtualization sounds good, let co-op on this so we don't
duplicate work.
Yes. Agreed.
As far as a meta-cloud layer is concerned, I'm not sure I am
knowledgeable enough in this area to weigh in. I'm currently
researching a filesystem implementation for OpenStack and have stumbled
across Ceph/RBD and Gluster modules that look promising. On top of
this,
XCP is documented to include support for VastSky and can be integrated
with DRBD. And, the storage and hypervisor are only two pieces of the
puzzle for a cloud implementation!
Cool !
I know, the meta-"cloud" name is quite/too ambitious, it was not meant
to be a one week effort. But why aim low :).
I think I would encourage you to also include OpenStack in a
meta-virtualization layer until it has matured to the point where
abstraction is more warranted.
Agree.
Since you've already created a presence
at github, would it be possible to rename your layer to
meta-virtualization and absorb the entire meta-xen layer? I can push
any changes for Xen/XCP here, it sounds like it is a central place for
libvirt and could also contain Bruce's kernel modifications.
Alternatively, I can create a meta-virtualization project. In any
case,
those on the To and CC list should receive access to this layer as a
starting point.
Just my two cents. :)
I'd like to offer to host this combined layer (whatever we decide to
call it) on git.yoctoproject.org if that would help people and people
are interested. My only concern is in the area of maintainership, we
need to clearly define who maintains what and what the patch submission
process is in the README.
Thanks,
Sounds good to centralize everything, since Raymond is the majority
code contributor, perhaps he, if willing, can maintain the
meta-virtualization layer.
If you want a co/sub-maintainer I'll be happy to help out.
Yes. Thanks Richard. I was looking at some of the Yocto projects and
the meta-ti stood out as one that might be a model for this. Would it be
possible to configure a mailing list for meta-virtualization as well?
Once you've got the repo in place I'll push up what's in meta-xen.
Maybe David can come behind with what's in meta-cloud. I also saw that
Mihai mentioned having a KVM tree that might integrate. Once we've got
this setup we should also rename the link on the OE layers index wiki.
I'm happy with a co-maintainer type setup as well. In fact, I prefer
that. I've done work with the xen part of this, but kvm and openstack
are still somewhat foreign.
At any rate, I'll pay closer attention to the lists as they pertain to
this layer especially going forward. I think this will work well to
combine our efforts here.
Ray
Cheers,
Richard
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
