RE: [DISCUSS] SystemVMs

2012-07-23 Thread Ewan Mellor
> -Original Message- > From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us] > > Convenience binaries can come from asf-hosted servers. They just > aren't 'releases', and we'd still have to comply with the terms of the > license. (and we'd need blessing from ASF-legal - and have the > authority to red

Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVMs

2012-07-23 Thread David Nalley
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Ewan Mellor wrote: > In general, you have to comply with all the terms of all the software inside > the VM. For a Linux distro like the System VM, that means meeting the GPL > requirements from the kernel and operating system tools in particular. This > means

RE: [DISCUSS] SystemVMs

2012-07-23 Thread Ewan Mellor
nk.zh...@citrix.com] > Sent: 20 July 2012 14:07 > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] SystemVMs > > Question about license. > What's license for system vm itself as it's actually a linux > distribution? > > > -Original Mess

Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-22 Thread Edison Su
Build a systemvm is pretty easy: just run patches/systemvm/debian/build systemvm.sh on a Ubuntu machine Sent from my iPhone On Jul 21, 2012, at 7:05 AM, "yueluck" wrote: > when users can get the documents about how to build systemVM step by step? > > > At 2012-07-10 01:23:22,"Kevin Kluge"

Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVMs

2012-07-20 Thread Daniel Mezentsev
Is this thread logically connected to my question about to move SystemVM to independent from CS infrastructure ? Question about license. What's license for system vm itself as it's actually a linux distribution? -Original Message- From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us] Sent: Friday,

RE: [DISCUSS] SystemVMs

2012-07-20 Thread Frank Zhang
Question about license. What's license for system vm itself as it's actually a linux distribution? > -Original Message- > From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us] > Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 1:56 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemVMs > > So the fi

RE: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-09 Thread Kevin Kluge
> Are you saying that you think that Apache CloudStack can provide Debian- > based systemVMs as part of a release (or in any other manner)? > If so, I am missing something. And I would love for this to not be the case, > I > just don't see how we can ship a big blob of GPL software given the > gu

Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-06 Thread John Kinsella
On Jul 6, 2012, at 8:25 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote: > Correct! Due to licensing we are however not allowed to distribute it in the > official releases. But we can always write a script: > > $ cloud-download-and-install-systemvm /srv/my-secondary-storage > > If URL is not specified it will dow

Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-06 Thread David Nalley
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Kevin Kluge wrote: > I had mentioned this concern (licensing and system VM presence) in the > earliest Apache discussions, and I included it in the CloudStack project > proposal at [1]. I had been told that it was a non-issue. That is, as long > as the code in

RE: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-06 Thread Kevin Kluge
I had mentioned this concern (licensing and system VM presence) in the earliest Apache discussions, and I included it in the CloudStack project proposal at [1]. I had been told that it was a non-issue. That is, as long as the code in our repo is of allowed license this dependency is fine, and

Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-06 Thread Wido den Hollander
On 07/06/2012 01:04 AM, Chiradeep Vittal wrote: On 7/5/12 11:58 AM, "David Nalley" wrote: Right now you have to download this weird qcow2 from the CS website, but that should be different I think: You set up CloudStack, configure your zone and then it will ask you to provide the System VM

Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-05 Thread Chiradeep Vittal
On 7/5/12 11:58 AM, "David Nalley" wrote: >>> >>>Right now you have to download this weird qcow2 from the CS website, but >>>that should be different I think: >>> >>>You set up CloudStack, configure your zone and then it will ask you to >>>provide the System VM template. >>> >>>We can still prov

Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-05 Thread David Nalley
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Chiradeep Vittal wrote: > Ah, Wido puts it much better. David's email kind of alarmed me. What did I say that alarmed you?? :) If it makes you feel better your email alarms me :) > > > On 7/5/12 7:24 AM, "Wido den Hollander" wrote: > [snip] > >> >>I agree. In ess

Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-05 Thread Chiradeep Vittal
Ah, Wido puts it much better. David's email kind of alarmed me. On 7/5/12 7:24 AM, "Wido den Hollander" wrote: [snip] > >I agree. In essence the System VM's are more (talking KVM-wise!) than a >Debian installation with the Java agent running in them. In the future, there may be even be multipl

Re: [DISCUSS] systemvms

2012-07-05 Thread Wido den Hollander
On 04-07-12 22:02, David Nalley wrote: Hi folks, I spent a bit of time going through the patches directory and working on license headers today. Historically CloudStack has made a Debian-based systemvm template available for each hypervisor. However, my sense is that going forward we will not