[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: F7 Plan (draft)

On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 07:47:06PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
 > On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 04:14:23PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
 > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 04:10:32PM -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
 > >  > On Wednesday 20 December 2006 16:03, Bill Nottingham wrote:
 > >  > > That implies KVM and lhype are working in Fedora. Which they aren't,
 > >  > > at the moment.
 > >  > 
 > >  > Having just watched Jeremy boot the next LiveCD test in KVM on his rawhide 
 > >  > box, I'd say its working a heck of a lot better than Xen.
 > > 
 > > We're still boned for paravirt though, which some may argue, is
 > > the more interesting case (given not everyone has a CPU with the right knobs).
 > Given that those CPUs have only been available from Intel or AMD for a
 > few *months* (~6), indeed, relatively few are in the hands of users.
 > Not to mention the performance hit from fully-virt at this point.
 > It'd be like announcing we were going to only produce Blu-Ray DVDs
 > from now on.
 > >From where can we get additional resources to help with the
 > Xen-in-Fedora merging, or is it the case that adding more people to an
 > already late project just makes it later?  In that case, what/how can we
 > offload Juan or whomever so they can focus?

The ramp-up time alone for that role is sufficient to put off most people.
It's really, really unfun work.  Xen needed to get upstream months ago,
but there's been near zero movement on that front.
Chris Wright has been trying to bend it to fit on top of the paravirt
stuff in the .19 kernel, so maybe there's hope yet, but personally, I'm
fairly jaded over the whole thing by now.  By the time Xen gets upstream
people will have moved on to the next fad.  (Which is one reason I'm
pushing back hard on requests like "merge -rt").



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]