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

Re: [Publicity] Blog for review: Xen4CentOS

I have amended the post to match the comments above.

Regarding the "petulant" comment: my apologies if it came off that
way, but the statement was factual.  I have edited it anyway.

However, we need to be aware of a real problem:  The majority of
people have no idea why the Xen Project Hypervisor is not in RHEL 6.
As a rule, I find that most people assume some package has been
dropped from a distribution because (1) it is non-functional or
otherwise problematic or (2) it has been superseded by a clearly
superior package.  When we refuse to mention the fact that Red Hat
made a business decision, we are inadvertently feeding the inaccurate
notion that Xen Project software is either non-functional or clearly
inferior.  As such, I never shy away from the subject, but I never
demean Red Hat either.  I state the fact and go on.

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Lars Kurth <lars.kurth@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> I would say that we should delay this post in that case. It would have more
> impact after a press release
> Lars
> On 30/04/2014 12:43, Sarah Conway wrote:
> We are planning to announce the Virt SIG soon. We just received the initial
> round of edits from the CentOS Project team on our news release and a
> Linux.com article.
> Given this, I would suggest deleting the last paragraph that discusses the
> Virt SIG until the news is issued. Alternatively, we could publish this blog
> when our news release is issued, but I understand if the group doesn't want
> to wait on the news release approvals.
> Estimated timing for the news release and Linux.com article would be in
> about a week and a half at a minimum. We still need Xen Project AB
> review/approval and one more review from CentOS.
> Thanks,
> Sarah
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 5:58 AM, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> On 04/30/2014 10:42 AM, Lars Kurth wrote:
>> On 30/04/2014 09:53, George Dunlap wrote:
>> Looks fine overall.  Just two comments:
>> * "...the kernel which Red Hat decided didnât need to support the Xen
>> Project Hypervisor."  This may be interpreted as a bit petulant: I think for
>> a technical post, we just want to stick to the facts.
>> Agreed. The phrasing made me feel that I didn't want to continue reading.
>> all that is needed, is ".... ,which does not support the Xen Project
>> Hypervisor"
>> * The Virt SIG seems like a bit of an afterthought: in the "What does the
>> Future Hold" section, I would start with the development of the Virt SIG,
>> and then mention our plans (updating  every other Xen release, &c).
>> How about something like this:
>> The Xen4CentOS is not a one-time, cut-and-run hack. It is being
>> transitioned into the newly formed  CentOS Virtualization SIG. This CentOS
>> SIG will focus on providing a specialized CentOS variant suitable for
>> various virtualization technologies, including the Xen Project Hypervisor.
>> The plan is to provide regular security and bug-fix updates as needed and to
>> upgrade the Xen Project Hypervisor with every even major release (4.4, 4.6,
>> etc) and to provide matching updates for QEMU, libvirt and other dependent
>> packages.
>> So if you were thinking about trying Xen Project software on CentOS, there
>> is now every reason to give it a try.
>> Sounds good to me.
>>  -George
>> _______________________________________________
>> Publicity mailing list
>> Publicity@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/publicity
> --
> Sarah Conway
> PR Manager
> The Linux Foundation
> sconway@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (978) 578-5300  Cell
> Skype:  sarah.k.conway
> _______________________________________________
> Publicity mailing list
> Publicity@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/publicity

Publicity mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.