Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/1] ceph/rbd block driver for qemu-kvm

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

On 05/25/2010 05:01 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>
>> The current situation is that those block format drivers only exist in
>> qemu.git or as patches.  Surely that's even more unhappiness.
>>      
> The difference is that in the current situation these drivers will be
> part of the next qemu release, so the patch may be obsolete, but you
> don't even need it any more.
>    

The next qemu release may be six months in the future.  So if you're not 
happy with running qemu.git master or with patching a stable release, 
you have to wait.

> If you start keeping block drivers outside qemu and not even try
> integrating them, they'll stay external.
>    

Which may or may not be a problem.

>> Confusion could be mitigated:
>>
>>     $ qemu -module my-fancy-block-format-driver.so
>>     my-fancy-block-format-driver.so does not support this version of qemu
>> (0.19.2).  Please contact my-fancy-block-format-driver-devel@example.org.
>>
>> The question is how many such block format drivers we expect.  We now
>> have two in the pipeline (ceph, sheepdog), it's reasonable to assume
>> we'll want an lvm2 driver and btrfs driver.  This is an area with a lot
>> of activity and a relatively simply interface.
>>      
> What's the reason for not having these drivers upstream? Do we gain
> anything by hiding them from our users and requiring them to install the
> drivers separately from somewhere else?
>    

Six months.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function