* Dave Miner (dminer at opensolaris.org) wrote: > 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.
Sounds like a plan. Thanks Dave. -- Glenn
