On 11/09/12 7:25 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hey Murali, > >If that is the case, should the Premium storage class not be in >vmware-base? It is now in the plugin, so the plugin needs to be installed >in the system vm for vmware support to work anyway? > >Cheers, > >Hugo > No, I think premium storage class could be a separate Jar. Ideally we would should have a way for plugin's to tell what component/jar's should go in to management server and system VM's. Right now there is single plugin that is packaged into both server and system VM. Vmware-base is just convenience library which does not have CloudStack functionality. My only concern is if that is merged into Vmware-plugin, over the time, it get coupled with the hypervisor specific code. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Murali Reddy [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 12:25 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: combining vmware-base and plugin/hypervisor/vmware? >> >> On 11/09/12 1:18 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >Hey Chip, >> > >> >Good point, but by looking at the code it seems the other way around. >> >Most of the generic stuff is inside the plugin (including parts of the >> >code for the cisco nexus integration and the vmware version of the >> >SSVM) and in particular the hypervisor code is in the vmware-base. >> > >> >For now I think it is more clear if we combine everything in the vmware >> >plugin directory, should there be a need we can always separate the >> >interface. For now I think it's unlikely that something is done via the >> >vmware api that is not directly related to the vmware hypervisor (or >> >used by peeps that don't use the vmware hypervisor). >> > >> >Cheers, >> > >> >Hugo >> >> When I initially moved vmware into a plug-in, I left vmware-base as >> independently buildable jar, so that it can packaged to systemvm.iso and >> management server separately. SSVM (which gets vmware version of >> secondary storage resource from systemvm.iso) just need vmware-base, not >> complete vmware plug-in. >> >> How about moving vmware-base stuff into plugin/hypervisor/vmware folder >> but still retain project & jar for it? So if need arises its easy to >>move it out. >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 3:39 PM >> >> To: [email protected] >> >> Subject: Re: combining vmware-base and plugin/hypervisor/vmware? >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Hugo Trippaers >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Heya, >> >> > >> >> > Anybody against moving all sources from vmware-base to >> >> plugin/hypervisors/vmware? It seems more logical to combine these two >> >> trees and make it a single plugin. >> >> > >> >> > Cheers, >> >> > >> >> > Hugo >> >> >> >> Hey Hugo, >> >> >> >> There might be a reason to keep it broken out. For example, let's >> >>say that I wanted to build a different plugin type that uses the >> >>VMware API. >> >> >> >> -chip >> > >> > >
