Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-04 Thread Stefan de Konink
Last time *your* argument was that the API would get too big. Now why isn't that argument valid anymore? I'm honestly asking for an explanation on this point, and I do expect you have it. Stefan -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@redhat.com

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-04 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 05:04:50PM +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: Last time *your* argument was that the API would get too big. Now why isn't that argument valid anymore? I'm honestly asking for an explanation on this point, and I do expect you have it. You are confusing internal API with

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-04 Thread Stefan de Konink
Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 05:04:50PM +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: Last time *your* argument was that the API would get too big. Now why isn't that argument valid anymore? I'm honestly asking for an explanation on this point, and I do expect you have it. You are

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-04 Thread Ben Guthro
As part of the internal API (and not explicitly exported from src/libvirt_sym.version) The xml parsing would not be available to external apps. Stefan de Konink wrote on 11/04/2008 11:21 AM: Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 05:04:50PM +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: Last

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-04 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 05:21:50PM +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 05:04:50PM +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: Last time *your* argument was that the API would get too big. Now why isn't that argument valid anymore? I'm honestly asking for an

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-04 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 12:39:11AM +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: Daniel P. Berrange wrote: When you update to work with latest CVS, I'd strongly recommend you make use of the brand new XML handling APIs we have in domain_conf.h. We have switched all drivers over to use these shared internal

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-04 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Ruben S. Montero wrote: On Monday 03 November 2008 17:59:33 Daniel Veillard wrote: This is a bit against the Node principle of libvirt, and could result in some fun in the hardware discovery mode, but in general the approach might work. Still we

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-04 Thread Ruben S. Montero
On Tuesday 04 November 2008 09:12:00 Daniel Veillard wrote: Ok. It sounds fine. We will update our implementation to CVS head (right now the patch is targeted for 0.4.4), update licenses to LGPL, and we will check if 'make check syntax-check' works. Also We'll try to split the patch in

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-04 Thread Ruben S. Montero
Hi Daniel, Thanks very much for your suggestions, the new version of the driver will make use of the new XML handing API. Regarding the use of a 'cluster' or 'host group' element we'll make a summary of the limitations we found when dealing with a cluster, so you can have a clear view. Cheers

[libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-03 Thread Ruben S. Montero
Dear all, You may find of interest a new implementation of the libvirt virtualization API. This new implementation adds support to OpenNebula, a distributed VM manager system. The implementation of libvirt on top of a distributed VM manager, like OpenNebula, provides an abstraction of a

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-03 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 12:23:47PM +0100, Ruben S. Montero wrote: Dear all, You may find of interest a new implementation of the libvirt virtualization API. This new implementation adds support to OpenNebula, a distributed VM manager system. The implementation of libvirt on top of a

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-03 Thread Daniel Veillard
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 05:26:34PM +0100, Ruben S. Montero wrote: Hi Daniel On Monday 03 November 2008 16:43:32 Daniel Veillard wrote: Interesting, but this raises a couple of questions: - isn't OpenNebula in some way also an abstraction layer for the hypervisors, so in a

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-03 Thread Ruben S. Montero
On Monday 03 November 2008 17:59:33 Daniel Veillard wrote: This is a bit against the Node principle of libvirt, and could result in some fun in the hardware discovery mode, but in general the approach might work. Still we are looking at bits on the node to provide capabilities of the

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-03 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 08:32:54PM +0100, Ruben S. Montero wrote: On Monday 03 November 2008 17:59:33 Daniel Veillard wrote: This is a bit against the Node principle of libvirt, and could result in some fun in the hardware discovery mode, but in general the approach might work. Still we

Re: [libvirt] New Libvirt Implementation - OpenNebula

2008-11-03 Thread Stefan de Konink
Daniel P. Berrange wrote: When you update to work with latest CVS, I'd strongly recommend you make use of the brand new XML handling APIs we have in domain_conf.h. We have switched all drivers over to use these shared internal APIs for parsing the domain XML schema, so it would let you delete