Re: [Publicity] Blog Czar update, week of Sept 9

[Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On gio, 2013-09-19 at 15:10 +0100, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 01:05:09AM +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
>
> > For instance, in the very first sentence you mention both "QEMU" and the
> > "old qemu-traditional". Apart from adding the proper hyperlinking, what
> > about stating once more, as clearly as possible, what the differences
> > are, i.e., which one is what, which one is the default, etc.?
> 
> Yes, I can write a bit more about the difference between qemu and
> qemu-trad.
> 
Ok.

> > "A thing called dirty tracking of physical memory", worth expanding a
> > little bit to tell people what it is and why it is important? Still in
> > that sentence, I'm not sure I understand what the following means: "but
> > it has also been backported to 4.2, so itâs not that new".
> > 
> 
> What I meant was the memory dirty tracking was not part of the 4.2
> release, but appear later in the 4.2.2 release. This was an important
> missing feature to be able to live-migrate a guest.
> 
Ok, now I understood it. Consider putting it right in the way you just
did here, I think it'd be more clear.

> > What about some of the development that is happening right now, whether
> > or not it is targeting 4.4? You've got QEMU stubdom there already, I
> > know, but is that the only thing happening on the qemu side? Perhaps we
> > can quickly list what we've got in George's development update that is
> > qemu related with a few words of context? I'm sure there's someone
> > (Fabio Fantoni?) working on improved USB controller, spice and qxl
> > support... No need to have a detailed tech report, but it perhaps is
> > worth at least mentioning?
> 
> Yes, I can try to list more things.
> 
> > Another thing that I think could be interesting to (re)state is what
> > does it mean to achieve the goal of getting rid of qemu-traditional? Why
> > is it a good thing? For instance, in 4.4 there will be config options
> > for using the distro provided QEMU, instead of cloning and building our
> > own (whether it is upstream or traditional), wont it? If yes, that I
> > think is quite a _big_deal_ (or so I always hear from distro people!).
> > 
> > So... Am I talking nonsense? Do you think it's worth trying to add at
> > least some of the things I mentioned?
> 
> Yes, I'll try to put something togethere.
> 
Ok... It's Thursday afternoon already so, you know, the sooner the
better! :-P

Regards,
Dario

-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Publicity mailing list
Publicity@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/publicity