On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 03:16:26PM +0100, Martin Sivak wrote: > > My view on what profiles are for differs from this. In particular > > I do *not* consider the profiles to be application specific. > > Oh, I think we are talking about different applications. > > I agree all management products (the applications you talk about) > should use the same data. > > But workload profiles are about guest application specific needs (the > apps I talk about) and pure osinfo is about guest application > independent guest os defaults. Here the application means the app > running within the VM. Ok, that's not neccessarily a problem. The set of profiles will be extensible in the normal manner by adding new XML files. So we can have some profiles that are generic best practice for the guest + hypervisor combination. Those can be used as a starting point for any person/app who wishes to define further profiles that taken into account specific guest applications. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| _______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
