On 03/23/2010 02:54 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
> * Alexander Graf<agraf@suse.de>  wrote
>> Yes. I think the point was that every layer in between brings potential
>> slowdown and loss of features.
>>      
> Exactly. The more 'fragmented' a project is into sub-projects, without a
> single, unified, functional reference implementation in the center of it, the
> longer it takes to fix 'unsexy' problems like trivial usability bugs.
>
> Furthermore, another negative effect is that many times features are
> implemented not in their technically best way, but in a way to keep them local
> to the project that originates them. This is done to keep deployment latencies
> and general contribution overhead down to a minimum. The moment you have to
> work with yet another project, the overhead adds up.
>
> So developers rather go for the quicker (yet inferior) hack within the
> sub-project they have best access to.
>
> Tell me this isnt happening in this space ;-)
>    
Integration is hard, requires a wider set of technical skills and 
getting good test coverage becomes more difficult.
But I agree that it is worth the effort, kvm could reap large rewards 
from putting a greater emphasis on integration (ala vbox) - no matter 
how it is achieved (cowardly not taking sides on implementation 
decisions like repository locations).

Antoine

quoted text
> Thanks,
>
> 	Ingo
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>    

--
unsubscribe notice
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/