On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 08:45 +0200, Rebecca Walter wrote: > While I respect the concerns expressed by the community so far, I don't think > these outweigh the advantages seen by our experts. I don't think "virtual > host server" is more complicated than the other server terms we use > regularly. Virtual machine is definitely easier than what we've used in the > past. Although it sounds a bit wordy at first, "management virtual machine" > does make sense and has a good meaning. > > So as soon as my schedule permits, I will add these terms to the style guide. > > > Marcus, in the future, the project would appreciate it if you let us know > earlier in the process so we could be more involved in the discussion.
Rebecca, I know that I have come into this conversation a little late but I felt it needed discussion. I noticed throughout existing suse/novell documentation, with regard to virtual technology, that there seems to be a lack of definition with regards to the the types of VMMs. This is a very important issue to the end-user due to the inherent impact of the handling of resources within the VMM. e.g. type I and type II Type I: standalone, for example mainframes Type II: hosted, for example VMWare, Xen Thanks. Thomas R. Jones > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
