First of all, I'd like to say a big THANKS to all the people maintaining Xen within (in of course also outside) Debian; you really saved us lots of money and energy (which is both, electrical and that personal one). [...] > > > 4) What will be our preferred server virtualization option for non-Linux > > guests after squeeze? Still KVM? > Yes, virtualized Windows works much better in (modern) KVM than Xen. > > > 5) Do we recommend that new installations of lenny or of squeeze avoid > > Xen for ease of upgrading to squeeze+1? If so, what should they use? > It depends. KVM in lenny is buggy and lacks important features. While it > works fine for development and casual use I do not recommend using it in > production for critical tasks. > This is where Red Hat really beats us: RHEL shipped Xen years ago but > recently they released an update which provides a backported and > stabilized KVM. > > > 6) Are we communicating this to Debian users in some way? What can I do > > to help with this point? > Remind people that Xen is dying and KVM is the present and the future. > As I understand the later mails of Bastian and Ian, this is probably not an issue anyway, but still I'd like to note it: Even though KVM may have a promising future (on hardware with virtualization support, at least), there is a serious need for a nice migration path. It seems impossible to dist-upgrade to squeeze and switch from Xen to KVM at the same time. Thanks everyone, Michael
Attachment:
pgpudIMHuHTTs.pgp
Description: PGP signature