On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Russell Bryant <rbry...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 11/22/2013 10:43 AM, Rafał Jaworowski wrote: >> Russell, >> First, thank you for the whiteboard input regarding the blueprint for >> FreeBSD hypervisor nova driver: >> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/freebsd-compute-node >> >> We were considering libvirt support for bhyve hypervisor as well, only >> wouldn't want to do this as the first approach for FreeBSD+OpenStack >> integration. We'd rather bring bhyve bindings for libvirt later as >> another integration option. >> >> For FreeBSD host support a native hypervisor driver is important and >> desired long-term and we would like to have it anyways. Among things >> to consider are the following: >> - libvirt package is additional (non-OpenStack), external dependency >> (maintained in the 'ports' collection, not included in base system), >> while native API (via libvmmapi.so library) is integral part of the >> base system. >> - libvirt license is LGPL, which might be an important aspect for some users. > > That's perfectly fine if you want to go that route as a first step. > However, that doesn't mean it's appropriate for merging into Nova. > Unless there are strong technical justifications for why this approach > should be taken, I would probably turn down this driver until you were > able to go the libvirt route.
So just to clarify: the native driver for another hypervisor (bhyve) would not be accepted into Nova even if it met testing coverage criteria? As I said the libvirt route is an option we consider, but we would like to have the possibility of a native FreeBSD api integration as well, similar to what you can have for non-libvirt hypervisor apis available already in Nova. Rafal _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
