- Round the call for any additional agenda items
- Action Updates
- Coordinating work items
- qemu package maintenance by oVirt
- related questions: libvirt and qemu versions required
- oVirt's position within the CentOS SIG ecosystem. Specifically, is Virt SIG the best place for oVirt?
- RPM subpackage structure
- Bug tracker
- Mailing list policy (would probably want to wait for a bit more feedback)
- Lars Kurth
- George Dunlap
- Jonathan Ludlam
- Brian Proffit
- Karanbir Singh
- Euan Harris
- Douglas Landgraf
Topics we did cover
1. Action Updates
List at status has been updated
2. Coordinating work items (George)
- Proposal : post every pull request to the list first
- Increases visibility for everyone
- Avoids wasted effort
- Post proposed changes to the list
- wait for 2 days and gather feedback
- Apply pull requests
- Security issues may be different when under embargo (will need to discuss this at some point). What is the process for security updates?
- KB: have CentOS security team handle security issues (triaging) for all SIGs
ACTION KB: start discussion on the CentOS-devel list
3. qemu package maintenance by oVirt (Douglas)
- Douglas: proposed to include qemu package which enables live snapshots and maintain it
- George: KB and Jonny would have to review the technical details on how this would work. But the purpose of the SIG is to exactly to cater for this case
- Douglas: just need to need to enable a macro and do a rebuild (no changes higher up the stack are needed)
- George: Do you have an RPM based on RHEL?
- Douglas: Yes
Sounds in principle OK. The best approach would be to make a concrete proposal on the list and get community feedback
ACTION Douglas: Make a concrete proposal on the list with repos and spec files, etc and then have a discussion on the list
- Jon: There could possibly be versioning issues
- George: This is a known issue which has to be sorted on the list
At some point, we also need to write everything up on the wiki
4. oVirt's position within the CentOS SIG (Brian)
Had a discussion with Jim Perry and KB. Want to make sure that oVirt is part of CentOS sure. No clarity at this point whether oVirt is in the Virt SIG or Cloud SIG.
- Lars: No objections, but maybe suggest to ask the question on the list
- George: KB had a vision on partitioning SIGs. So we need to get his opinion. To begin with we need to be flexible.
- Brian: Had a conversation with KB. Very much into breaking SIGs into "special purpose" groups, e.g. a "Data Centre SIG"
Jon: XAPI (XenServer toolstack) would fit nicely into
- George: There is a trade-off between separate SIGs and a SIG which is more inclusive
- Brian: Being in one SIG would probably create more scope for collaboration and better integration
- Lars: I agree.
- KB: Was concerned about clear scope of SIGs and the dependency model
- George: What is the advantage/disadvantage of being in one SIG vs another
- KB: A cleaner dependency model may make things easier for SIGs to interface with each other
- George: Is everything in a SIG is at the same level
- KB: Main concern is about having to pull in dependent packages from SIGs in a higher level SIG making interface between SIGs difficult
- KB: Suggests one QEMU version for the SIG may make sense
- George: Points out that there are different trade-off's between two QEMU's or one (size and optimization issues)
Conclusion : We should assume for now that including oVirt is sensible and revisit, if there are difficult technical reasons why another SIG may be better suited.
ACTIONS Brian: Brian to make a proposal on the virt list. The key is to figure out all the dependencies.
- Jon: this may be more complex than we think (using the experience from XAPI so far)
Topics we did not cover
See Roadmap thread Probably need a wiki page
2. RPM subpackage structure
- Euan and Jonathan has some tooling to build some RPM packages (for development)
3. Bug tracker