Glenn Lagasse wrote: > Hi Dave, > > * Dave Miner (dminer at opensolaris.org) wrote: >>>> 1.2 This is somewhat wishy-washy about what to expect for >>>> non-VirtualBox hypervisors. I'd suggest a clear statement of whether >>>> it's in scope (and hence expected to be tested) or not, as >>>> specifically as you can be. >>> The only other bona-fide interested consumer I know of is the xVM team. >>> That said, it should be possible for VMWare clients to use the images >>> since it supports OVF but I haven't actually tried it. I'm not aware of >>> any requirement that we make our images work with VMWare so I believe I >>> can reword this to talk about VB and xVM exclusively. Unless anyone >>> else knows of other required hypervisors we have to work with. >>> >> Actually, I'm pretty darn certain marketing will expect that VMWare will >> be a tested, supported VM technology. Probably whatever Microsoft's >> thing is called, too (Hyper-V?). > > Do we know this? I haven't heard that Hyper-V is even going to support > OVF (though I'll look into it). I was under the impression that we had > to support VirtualBox and xVM, other hypervisors that supported OVF > *should* work depending on how closely they follow the spec but were > more of a 'nice to have' but not a requirement. If those platforms are > really a requirement, then that's fine but we'll need to do a lot more > research to see what those products OVF support story looks like.
Absolutely. Now, it's entirely possible we would respond, for now, to such a requirement by stating that we have chosen to support the industry standard format in this space. Just check out their roadmaps and discuss the possible requirement with marketing. Dave
