Virtual Media repository request

Czarnowski, Przemyslaw przemyslaw.hawrylewicz.czarnowski at
Fri Dec 17 20:28:28 AEDT 2021

On 15.12.2021 20:26, Ed Tanous wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 6:11 PM Jeremy Kerr <jk at> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>> Maybe Ed's proposal of using an existing repository solves that.  We
>>> would need to make sure the current maintainer is accepting of
>>> whatever design direction you've decided to go though.
>> I'm fine with replacing the jsnbd code with a newer implementation,
>> provided there's general community acceptance for doing so. If that's
>> the case, I'm happy to use the existing repo, or replacing openbmc/jsnbd
>> entirely - whatever suits best.
>> [Perhaps in your design document, you can expand the Alternatives
>> Considered section, to provide some motivation to change over]
>> However, I'm *not* OK with just introducing a completely alternate VM
>> implementation and leaving jsnbd as-is, where some platforms use one,
>> and some the other. We have way too many instances where there are two
>> separate implementations and/or repos that deliver the same
>> functionality. I would like to avoid making that problem worse.
> +1

I am ok with that approach, but I just wanted to separate service code 
and JS nbd server, as they are quite distinct entities from my perspective.
So yes for taking over VM functionality by the new service in separate 
repo, leaving only nbd server implementation on this repo.
What do you think?

>> So, either:
>>   - submit these as updates to jsnbd, which implement the new structure as
>>     you like. I'd be happy to hand over the repo to the new maintainers.
>>   or
>>   - provide the new VM implementation as a new repo, propose to change
>>     platforms to use the new implementation, and we can delete jsnbd.
>> Cheers,
>> Jeremy

Best regards,
Przemyslaw Czarnowski

More information about the openbmc mailing list