Hello everyone,
A small status at the beginning of this important day. While the
different development subgroups do a good job at reviewing their
colleagues branches, we have not been doing a good job as a project:
some branches that were proposed before the BMPFreeze date did not get
sufficiently
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Ewan Mellor wrote:
> Is there a name for the .vmx + .vmdk combination (i.e. a normal VMware VM
> format)? Maybe just "VMX" as an appliance format?
Sorry for the probably ignorant question here (I'm pretty ignorant to
a lot of the virtualization details :( ). Fro
I think vmx is the settings dike for the VM il vmware
On Jan 13, 2011 3:32 PM, "Jay Pipes" wrote:
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help :
An appliance is the combination of metadata describing the virtual machine
plus the virtual disks. The standard format in the virtualization industry
is OVF. Basically, differs from VMX+VMDK(s) because it has a XML format that
describes the virtual machine (and little bit its environment like
firew
2011/1/13 Diego Parrilla Santamaría :
> An appliance is the combination of metadata describing the virtual machine
> plus the virtual disks. The standard format in the virtualization industry
> is OVF. Basically, differs from VMX+VMDK(s) because it has a XML format that
> describes the virtual mach
I would just call it VMDK. That's what Vmware
(http://www.vmware.com/technical-resources/interfaces/vmdk.html) and
everyone else calls it, even though there may be extra files to support
it. We're just naming the disk format here.
We had also talked about the IMG disk format to support AMIs but
2011/1/13 Erik Carlin :
> I would just call it VMDK. That's what Vmware
> (http://www.vmware.com/technical-resources/interfaces/vmdk.html) and
> everyone else calls it, even though there may be extra files to support
> it. We're just naming the disk format here.
So, that's a "no" to adding VMX a
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Ewan Mellor wrote:
> At the risk of starting to shave yaks: do we want to have an openstack-common
> then? It seems to be DOA at the moment.
There's little to no agreement on common principles and code between
the projects, unfortunately. It would be best, IMHO,
Hello stackers,
With help from Monty Taylor, I've completed the support for i18n in Nova.
After notifying the Launchpad Translations team of this yesterday,
that team has already begun the translation of Nova into 7 different
languages: Asturian, Chinese (Simplified), Danish, Italian, Japanese,
R
I can understand that the Swift guys don't want to destabilize their codebase,
but Glance and Nova should have some common items, no? Lazy loading, logging,
and I18N support all spring to mind as likely to be common across Glance and
Nova.
Ewan.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jay Pipes
The lazy loading in common seems fine minus one small issue. If I read it
correctly It looks like it is limited to a class or module. There doesn't
seem to be a way to proxy into an object itself. I'd like to be able to
specify a class (or a method) and have it lazy loaded into an object bac
I see no problem with putting lazy loading in common. Just because it's there
doesn't mean swift has to use it. Common simply implies that they are modules
used by several, but not necessarily all, projects.
On Jan 13, 2011, at 3:24 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
> The lazy loading in common s
While I agree largely with the statements so far, I think the main issue
with nova-common is that the swift project and the nova project have pretty
much no communication going on between them. I think that is okay for now,
the projects are two rather distinct codebases dropped wholesale next to
ea
The LazyPluggable in nova common was based on yours I think. The class idea is
fine with me as long as those features are added. You just have to make sure
that you don't eat the exception in the try, catch, because that is what import
class was doing, but it was catching underlying import err
14 matches
Mail list logo
