On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:21:11AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
This is exactly the same situation: you have a forked version of upstream that requires special handling.
This is missing the point I have been trying to make. RHEL-5 is using the old Xen 3.0.3 codebase for XenD. We have added a large number of features to this over time. *ALL* of these features are things that are already
I don't think I am missing that point. I don't see much difference between the two cases, that's all.
It would likely be a totally different product, requiring a from-scratch libvirt driver to support it.
Let's see. Your policy has now led us to the situation where to enable storing of essential debug information, we have to duplicate several thousand lines of C code.
Or work to get the neccessary feature upstream so it be used by libvirt and all other users of XenD without everyone having to re-invent it in their private code trees.
Again, there is no work that can be done: it's forever NAKed. It's impossible to upstream it. It seems you are willing to let XenSource dictate what functionality libvirt is able to provide for Xen users. I care about improving the system even if XenSource's whims dictate otherwise, and it doesn't seem like we can reach agreement on this point. It's a pity our goals for what libvirt is all about aren't in agreement. regards, john