On 2018-06-06 16:55, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 10:42:33AM -0300, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>>> If we want a grand vision where a single file stores the whole VM, why
>>> not invest the work and make it right from the start?
>>
>> We don't want a grand vision where a single file stores the whole
>> VM.  This is exactly what I would like to avoid, by not inventing
>> a whole different appliance file format.
> 
> Besides, trying to get a grand vision from the start is a sure
> way to never have the design leave the drawing board.

Yes, but with our own non-qcow2 format we could easily start with
something simple and start over later.

> What we are asking for at this point is a way to stick a named blob in
> an image that people can use with qemu without jumping through hoops.
> 
> It seems like a generic enough addition that it seems highly likely
> to be useful down the road and harmless enough that maintaining
> it won't become a burden.

Yes.  Its genericity is a big part of what's bothering me.

> Can we agree on that as a first step, so we can build that foundation
> and move on to actually building ways to use it?

No, because I don't want to agree on putting anything inside qcow2
before I know its scope.

Max