On 15/04/13 23:28, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On 15/04/13 23:10, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Osier Yang <jyang@redhat.com> wrote:
On 15/04/13 22:41, harryxiyou wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:43 PM, harryxiyou <harryxiyou@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@redhat.com> wrote: [...] > I'm not hugely comfortable with the idea of "capability support" being > done by a student. IMHO to do a good job on that design-wise requires > someone with a very good understanding of libvirt architecture & > application > needs. > I understand. However, i think our Libvirt is developing so we should give more choices to learners who are very interested in some field of Libvirt.(Like me, i love the storage system of Libvirt very much). Maybe this is the essence of GSOC, isn't it? Actually, some student is not only interested in Libvirt but also wanna to join this community and contribute to this community forever. (Like me, i love the community because i can learn more knowledge from it.) I believe that interest is the best teacher. No matter how the problem is difficulty i will try my best to achieve it if i am very interested in it. Another key point is that GSOC just let students join the community and finish easy jobs firstly. GSOC wanna train more core developers for our community. If i can finish a job a bit difficulty, i can also accomplish it after GSOC continuously. All in all, i think you should not worry about this matter ;-).
Hi all,
After i read all comments from Danpb, Mprivozn, Osier, i find i should rephrase my project idea for Libvirt storage during GSOC 2013(Thanks for Stefan Hajnoczi. He let me know this key point). I find Osier and Mprivozn agree with the project named 'The capability support for storage' and Danpb just feel it is a bit difficulty for students to do, which i have given my feedback to explain. So i rephrase my project idea for Libvirt storage during GSOC 2013 like following.
Project name: The capability support for storage driver.
Summary: The capability support for storage driver (like virsh capabilities for the hypervisor drivers, e.g. what pool types it supports, what volume types each pool type supports, even may what operations/APIs the pool type support, ...etc).
Sill level: Advanced.
Osier said to me this is a deserved bug to fix so i think he may wanna be the mentor for this one, right?
I could be if you want, but the question is which project you are focusing on? This one or the renaming APIs? And as far as I got from the wiki page, we generally don't want the student fails, and the renaming APIs work is much simpler than this one, and thus more possible to succeed in 12 weeks.
So Personally I'd suggest adding the renaming APIs as a project into the wiki instead. Is that task reasonable for 12 weeks of full-time work?
Yes, It couldn't mean more than 3 months... I asked because it seems like a very mechanical and relatively short
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Osier Yang <jyang@redhat.com> wrote: thing to work on.
If only supports renaming for inactive objects, it is, and that was why I said I'm not sure if it's deserved. But if supports it for active objects too, it's not simple anymore.
If you still think the scope is good, then please add the project idea to the GSoC wiki using this template: http://qemu-project.org/Google_Summer_of_Code_2013#Project_idea_template