proposed universe demotion: virt-manager (or, a request for active maintenance)

[Dave Walker]

Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 21:41, Dustin Kirkland <kirkland at ubuntu.com 
> <mailto:kirkland at ubuntu.com>> wrote:
>
>     On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Martin Pitt
>     <martin.pitt at ubuntu.com <mailto:martin.pitt at ubuntu.com>> wrote:
>     >>  a) the Ubuntu Desktop Team provides active maintenance of
>     virt-manager, or
>     >>  b) virt-manager is demoted to Universe for Lucid.
>     >
>     > If someone in the Desktop team feels very attached to virt-manager,
>     > taking up maintenance would be nice, but speaking for my own,
>     it's so
>     > much easier to use the CLI.. Also, it's not anywhere near the
>     > stated goals of the desktop team, so it would be a kind of hobby
>     > project only.
>
>     Understood, and it's python-gtk GUI nature puts it a bit out of the
>     scope of the server team too (since Ubuntu Servers do not run X),
>     leaving it in this under-attended gray area.
>
> Servers might not be running X themselves OOTB, but users and admins 
> are still X forwarding apps that can be offered with a graphical 
> interface to their local desktops, are they not? 
>
> -- 
> Mario Limonciello
> superm1 at gmail.com <mailto:superm1 at gmail.com>
> Sent from Austin, TX, United States 
Hi Mario,

In this particular instance, it would be odd to run this application 
over forwarded X as it has great support for running locally and 
connecting to a server via ssh or X.509.  However the interesting point 
about this application is that it's only purpose is to manage a 
particular server stack.  The last time I tried this application I found 
it had potential, but was as yet underdeveloped.  This in itself might 
suggest that it doesn't belong in main.

An interesting issue that this discussion has raised is the question of 
who should maintain desktop applications that only exist for server 
use.  I would imagine that the Desktop team has a greater GTK skillset, 
but low interest or lack of infrastructure that most Server team 
developers would have.  Another such example is eBox, which is a 
graphical tool for managing a server, although in this instance the user 
interface is served from the server via http, making it the scope of the 
server team.  Nobody would use virt-manager, if they weren't using it to 
admin a server.

I agree that virt-manager doesn't belong in main, but the question of 
who looks after applications of this nature still needs satisfying.

Kind Regards,
Dave Walker