From: John Kelly <jak@isp2dial.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       dev@sw.ru, herbert@13thfloor.at, devel@openvz.org, sam@vilain.net,
       ebiederm@xmission.com, xemul@sw.ru, haveblue@us.ibm.com, clg@fr.ibm.com,
       serue@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] namespaces: Introduction
Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 15:23:20 -0400
Message-ID: <200605181923.k4IJNL5a007645@isp2dial.com>
References: <20060518154700.GA28344@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> <20060518103430.080e3523.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060518103430.080e3523.akpm@osdl.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1078
Lines: 27

On Thu, 18 May 2006 10:34:30 -0700, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
wrote:

>I see two ways of justifying a mainline merge of things such as this

>a) We make an up-front decision that Linux _will_ have OS-virtualisation
>   capability in the future

After using OpenVZ for a short time, I wonder how I ever managed
without it.  For application development and testing, having a little
sandbox with only a few PIDs running makes it easier to debug things.


> and just start putting in place the pieces for that, even if some
> of them are not immediately useful.  I suspect that'd be acceptable,
> although I worry that we'd get partway through and some issues would
> come up which are irreconcilable amongst the various groups.

>From a user's POV, I want it ASAP.  As for conflicts, why not cross
that bridge when you come to it?


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/