virtio-win drivers

[John Poelstra]

Paul W. Frields said the following on 01/14/2010 10:09 AM Pacific Time:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:01:25AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:30:45AM -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
>>> The Windows drivers required to install using kvm virtio have not been
>>> included in previous Fedora releases.  This is a serious omission, in
>>> that virtio makes a noticeable performance difference for the guest.
>>> While it is understood that packaging up an ISO of binary drivers for
>>> Windows which koji cannot build is not acceptable for the fedora
>>> repositories, we have a problem in that we need drivers which are known
>>> to work with a given Fedora release.  A possible solution is to have
>>> virt-install or virt-manager download the ISO if it is not already
>>> present on the host.  The ISO is only around 4MB, so this shouldn't be
>>> too big of an issue.
>>>
>>> In order to make this work, and know that we are getting drivers that
>>> should work with Fedora, we really need a place to host the "officially
>>> supported" virtio-win drivers for Fedora.  The drivers themselves are
>>> open source, GPL license applies.  The only blocker from the real
>>> repositories is the fact that koji cannot build them.  We are asking the
>>> board for approval and possibly a hosting location for these drivers so
>>> that they can be supported in the Fedora space.  Would this be a
>>> possibility?
>>
>>
>> <board_hat>
>> I'm not opposed, but such storage requests should be made to
>> Infrastructure.
>> </board_hat>
>>
>> <infrastructure_hat>
>> We have space available (mirrored or not).  Please fill out a Request
>> for Resources ticket, including space needed (plan for multiple
>> releases and OS targets over time), duration, frequency of updates,
>> and any guesstimate on how many downloads are expected.  The latter
>> will help decide if we need to put this on the mirrors, or not.
>> </infrastructure_hat>
>
> Can someone clarify the issue for the Board here?
>

Is it one of our existing written policies that we only provide content 
built by Koji?  I'm curious if anyone knows if/where we state that.

John