Re: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] Re: Supporting hypervisor specific APIs in libvirt
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:49:45 +0200
Avi Kivity <avi(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 03/24/2010 06:42 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:42:16 +0200
> Avi Kivity<avi(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>> So, at best qemud is a toy for people who are annoyed by libvirt.
>>
> Is the reason for doing this in qemu because libvirt is annoying?
Mostly.
> I don't see
> how adding yet another layer/daemon is going to improve ours and user's life
> (the same applies for libqemu).
>
libvirt becomes optional.
I think it should only be optional if all you want is to run a single VM
in this case what seems to be missing on our side is a _real_ GUI, bundled
with QEMU potentially written in a high-level language.
Then we make virt-manager optional and this is good because we can sync
features way faster and we don't have to care about _managing_ several
VMs, our world in terms of usability and maintainability is about one VM.
IMVHO, everything else should be done by third-party tools like libvirt,
we just provide the means for it.