FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Server Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-29-2010, 07:04 PM
Vishal Rao
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

For a regular user who wants a UI frontend to operate KVM etc, what
are my options?
Right now I am quite forced to move to VirtualBox/VMware because I'm
too noobish to work with the command line.

If debian does not have updated package, is it possible to "cross
merge" from Fedora who seem to have the latest and greatest?

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 01-31-2010, 02:41 AM
Dustin Kirkland
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Martin Pitt <martin.pitt@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> *a) the Ubuntu Desktop Team provides active maintenance of virt-manager, or
>> *b) virt-manager is demoted to Universe for Lucid.
>
> If someone in the Desktop team feels very attached to virt-manager,
> taking up maintenance would be nice, but speaking for my own, it's so
> much easier to use the CLI.. Also, it's not anywhere near the
> stated goals of the desktop team, so it would be a kind of hobby
> project only.

Understood, and it's python-gtk GUI nature puts it a bit out of the
scope of the server team too (since Ubuntu Servers do not run X),
leaving it in this under-attended gray area.

> If it's not really getting maintenance from core devs, but needs some,
> then demotion sounds appropriate.

Ack, I agree with your wording.

:-Dustin

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 01-31-2010, 02:43 AM
Dustin Kirkland
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Vishal Rao <vishalrao@gmail.com> wrote:
> For a regular user who wants a UI frontend to operate KVM etc, what
> are my options?
> Right now I am quite forced to move to VirtualBox/VMware because I'm
> too noobish to work with the command line.

Let me reiterate ... I am not proposing that we drop it from the
archive, but merely move it from Main to Universe.

We use (and depend) on dozens of packages every day that are in
Universe. You would not lose access to virt-manager, but rather the
stated support for the package would actually line up with the reality
I feel we currently have.

:-Dustin

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 01-31-2010, 02:47 AM
Dustin Kirkland
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 3:30 AM, Nikolai K. Bochev
<n.bochev@grandstarco.com> wrote:
> I am currently ( karmic ) using virt-manager from a PPA ( https://launchpad.net/~dnjl/+archive/virtualization ) along with libvirt and qemu/kvm from there. It would be really nice if virt-manager gets the needed attention, since for now it is really the only viable option if you want to work with KVM under a graphical environment. Not to mention it's the only way to actually view a console of virtual machines and easy add/remove devices/ram/whatever again to a remote KVM server ( yes i know and i can use the CLI commands, but it's a different experience ). You can actually view the cpu/net/hdd loads with virt-manager in real time also, the CLI doesn't give you that , at least not in such a nice way. If ubuntu wants to push KVM as virtualization tech, you should support all the tools for it.

So again, I'm not debating the utility of virt-manager -- I think it
certainly is a useful tool that fits a need that you and other users
have.

And I'm certainly not suggesting that we drop it from the archive, but
rather move it from Main to Universe such that our stated support
model actually matches the reality we have -- it's a GUI program that
the Ubuntu Server Team doesn't maintain, and a Server-related program
that doesn't fit the Desktop Team's current charter.

:-Dustin

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 01-31-2010, 04:05 AM
Vishal Rao
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

2010/1/31 Dustin Kirkland <kirkland@canonical.com>:
> Let me reiterate ... *I am not proposing that we drop it from the
> archive, but merely move it from Main to Universe.

Yup, I understand that.

I meant to say I was hoping for the second part of the email subject
"better active maintenance" but then a followup email mentions a
PPA which I guess might have the latest, or worst case I can just
manually download latest upstream source and build it myself.

So there are options, yes. I was just trying to point out that the current state
of it makes is near impossible for an average joe to use, forcing a switch to
other ones.

I wonder if its better to drop this less-well-maintained package from the repos,
so that a random user realises its missing and then goes looking for a PPA
or upstream source instead of using the stale package and getting a wrong
impression (like I did) and not bothering to look for a PPA.

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 01-31-2010, 08:49 AM
Etienne Goyer
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

Dustin Kirkland wrote:
> And I'm certainly not suggesting that we drop it from the archive, but
> rather move it from Main to Universe such that our stated support
> model actually matches the reality we have -- it's a GUI program that
> the Ubuntu Server Team doesn't maintain, and a Server-related program
> that doesn't fit the Desktop Team's current charter.

My concern regarding this demotion is not technical, it is about the
message we send. Packages in main are those we reputedly care about,
enough so that we commit resource to maintain them over the lifetime of
the release. Packages in universe are said to provided as-is, with no
guarantee as to whether security issues they may have are being
addressed in due time. Back when hardy was released, and with the
introduction of KVM/libvirt notably, Ubuntu was positioning itself as a
virtualization-ready platform. The demotion of virt-manager to universe
weaken that message.

Whether we like it or not, a GUI is something important to a lot people.
As one of the tenet of Ubuntu is to democratize Linux, it would be
rather ambiguous if we where to decide that a libvirt GUI, which make
virtualization accessible to beginners, is not really important enough
for us to commit ongoing resources to.

Just to be clear, I am not being demeaning to the excellent work of the
MOTU team. They do an herculean job, given the size of universe. I
appreciate their work, but I also understand that maintenance of a
long-released package may not be high on their priority list, and that
is perfectly fair.

This discussion will likely not end in a consensus. Someone, somewhere
should just make a decision about it.


--
Etienne Goyer
Technical Account Manager - Canonical Ltd
Ubuntu Certified Instructor - LPIC-3

~= Ubuntu: Linux for Human Beings =~

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 01-31-2010, 06:29 PM
Serge van Ginderachter
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

On 31 January 2010 04:43, Dustin Kirkland <kirkland@canonical.com> wrote:


On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Vishal Rao <vishalrao@gmail.com> wrote:

> For a regular user who wants a UI frontend to operate KVM etc, what

> are my options?

> Right now I am quite forced to move to VirtualBox/VMware because I'm

> too noobish to work with the command line.



Let me reiterate ... *I am not proposing that we drop it from the

archive, but merely move it from Main to Universe.



We use (and depend) on dozens of packages every day that are in

Universe. *You would not lose access to virt-manager, but rather the

stated support for the package would actually line up with the reality

I feel we currently have.

From a pure user perspective, please allow me to explain my point of view, as I view it. I'm prettu sure lot's of users see it in a similar way.

- Ubuntu/Canonical choose KVM as its main Virtualisation technology.


- KVM is gaining more and more attention, especially since Red Hat choose it as its own main virtualisation solution.
- Ubuntu wants to be Linux for human beings, which amongst others - and imho -* means it needs to maintain a full stack of userland tools for its solutions. I think a GUI application to KVM is a part of that.


- Canonical/Ubuntu internal discussions on how "server team" and "desktop team" are separate entities which can't manage to agree on the full stack of end user experience are not what I call "professional support". (Imho virt-manager is part of the server offering, end of discussion.


- I understand that having software in Universe is for most users pretty much the same as software in Main, but again, this is a very poor argument in "entreprise environments". At some point bugs will arise which won't get the needed attention because the soft is in Universe.



I do apologise in advance if my words seems a bit harsh, as this is obviously not intended.
--
* * Met vriendelijke groet,

* * Serge van Ginderachter

Disclaimer: by sending an email to ANY of my addresses you are agreeing that:



1. I am by definition, "the intended recipient"
2. All information in the email is mine to do with as I see fit and make such financial profit,
* * political mileage, or good joke as it lends itself to. In particular, I may quote it on usenet.


3. I may take the contents as representing the views of your company.
4. This overrides any disclaimer or statement of confidentiality
* * that may be included on your message


"Clear your mind of 'can't.'." - Samuel Johnson
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 01-31-2010, 11:09 PM
Carlos Ribeiro
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 01:47, Dustin Kirkland <kirkland@canonical.com> wrote:


So again, I'm not debating the utility of virt-manager -- I think it

certainly is a useful tool that fits a need that you and other users

have.

Good.



And I'm certainly not suggesting that we drop it from the archive, but

rather move it from Main to Universe such that our stated support

model actually matches the reality we have -- it's a GUI program that

the Ubuntu Server Team doesn't maintain, and a Server-related program

that doesn't fit the Desktop Team's current charter.

Perhaps we should have something like a working group focused on graphical management tools. These tools run in graphical mode but are strongly related with the server stuff, and are completely out of the reality of the desktop people. Some of it may be web-based but some may run with GTK or whatever. Also note that most commercial server products ships with a GUI - even
if it runs remotely (ex: VMWare Infrastructure comes to mind).

I believe such a group could be formed with people that run servers but either (a) like having a GUI tool for some tasks or (b) are connected to a organization that runs or rely on GUI tools for server management. There must be at least a few folks outside there with the necessary knowledge and interest in the subject to make it fly. It makes sense from a practical standpoint because it makes easier to manage servers for people that are not intimate with the command line, allowing them to run their servers, secure and with a small memory footprint, BUT managing them from a GUI install at their desks. It also sounds like a great marketing move.



Last, I believe this group should be a working group of the server group and not of the desktop group. These tools may be included in the desktop distribution but are "server stuff", that only runs on a desktop "by accident" (I think you understand what I mean).



What do you think?
--
Carlos Ribeiro
Consultoria em Projetos
twitter: http://twitter.com/carribeiro
blog: http://rascunhosrotos.blogspot.com


mail: carribeiro@gmail.com

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 02-01-2010, 06:03 AM
Mario Limonciello
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 21:41, Dustin Kirkland <kirkland@ubuntu.com> wrote:

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Martin Pitt <martin.pitt@ubuntu.com> wrote:

>> *a) the Ubuntu Desktop Team provides active maintenance of virt-manager, or

>> *b) virt-manager is demoted to Universe for Lucid.

>

> If someone in the Desktop team feels very attached to virt-manager,

> taking up maintenance would be nice, but speaking for my own, it's so

> much easier to use the CLI.. Also, it's not anywhere near the

> stated goals of the desktop team, so it would be a kind of hobby

> project only.



Understood, and it's python-gtk GUI nature puts it a bit out of the

scope of the server team too (since Ubuntu Servers do not run X),

leaving it in this under-attended gray area.


Servers might not be running X themselves OOTB, but users and admins are still X forwarding apps that can be offered with a graphical interface to their local desktops, are they not?*

--
Mario Limonciello
superm1@gmail.com
Sent from Austin, TX, United States
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 
Old 02-01-2010, 08:59 AM
Dave Walker
 
Default proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 21:41, Dustin Kirkland <kirkland@ubuntu.com
> <mailto:kirkland@ubuntu.com>> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Martin Pitt
> <martin.pitt@ubuntu.com <mailto:martin.pitt@ubuntu.com>> wrote:
> >> a) the Ubuntu Desktop Team provides active maintenance of
> virt-manager, or
> >> b) virt-manager is demoted to Universe for Lucid.
> >
> > If someone in the Desktop team feels very attached to virt-manager,
> > taking up maintenance would be nice, but speaking for my own,
> it's so
> > much easier to use the CLI.. Also, it's not anywhere near the
> > stated goals of the desktop team, so it would be a kind of hobby
> > project only.
>
> Understood, and it's python-gtk GUI nature puts it a bit out of the
> scope of the server team too (since Ubuntu Servers do not run X),
> leaving it in this under-attended gray area.
>
> Servers might not be running X themselves OOTB, but users and admins
> are still X forwarding apps that can be offered with a graphical
> interface to their local desktops, are they not?
>
> --
> Mario Limonciello
> superm1@gmail.com <mailto:superm1@gmail.com>
> Sent from Austin, TX, United States
Hi Mario,

In this particular instance, it would be odd to run this application
over forwarded X as it has great support for running locally and
connecting to a server via ssh or X.509. However the interesting point
about this application is that it's only purpose is to manage a
particular server stack. The last time I tried this application I found
it had potential, but was as yet underdeveloped. This in itself might
suggest that it doesn't belong in main.

An interesting issue that this discussion has raised is the question of
who should maintain desktop applications that only exist for server
use. I would imagine that the Desktop team has a greater GTK skillset,
but low interest or lack of infrastructure that most Server team
developers would have. Another such example is eBox, which is a
graphical tool for managing a server, although in this instance the user
interface is served from the server via http, making it the scope of the
server team. Nobody would use virt-manager, if they weren't using it to
admin a server.

I agree that virt-manager doesn't belong in main, but the question of
who looks after applications of this nature still needs satisfying.

Kind Regards,
Dave Walker



--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:18 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org