On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Avi Kivity <a...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 09/04/2010 04:56 PM, Andreas Färber wrote: >> >> Maybe it's time to rethink the relation between QEMU and its frontends / >> management tools? If we want to compete with the commercial products (sic), >> we might agree on some "official" frontend per GUI-centric platform, with a >> Git-based repository (like qemu-kvm.git) and synchronized releases that may >> call themselves "QEMU", linked from qemu.org, rather than having a variety >> of (outdated) Q* frontends per platform of which most are nothing more than >> a configuration window to spawn the regular qemu[-system-x86_64]. > > There is also virt-manager which is quite rich at this time. > >> Currently what QEMU can point with is richer machine and hardware >> emulation and its license; if we want more users than that, we'll need to >> deliver what users usually want the most - stability, performance and ease >> of use... and good marketing. > > They may as well be merged into qemu.git directly, so long as: > > - the GUI has its own maintainer > - the prepackaged GUI doesn't get access to internal APIs, compared to > external tools
Easy to use GUI and integration to host system are important, but performance is also a big problem. QEMU/TCG can't compete with alternatives that use proprietary kernel modules. Someone should recreate kqemu by using KVM compatible interfaces.
