Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Matthew Miller
On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 10:37:05AM +0100, Joe Brockmeier wrote: > > So EOL implies that no one should ever be able to launch a VM for it? > > Makes no sense to me. > It's no longer receiving updates, so that does actually make sense. > Can you describe the use case for an EOL release that might

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Jan Kurik
Hi Hannes, Fedora-21 is now EOL. So, it makes complete sense to me these images are already not available. Regards, Jan On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 3:19 AM, wrote: > What is the motivation for the eager deletion of the official Fedora VM > images (AMIs) from EC2? The image for 21

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Joe Brockmeier
On 02/03/2016 09:24 AM, Hannes Schmidt wrote: > > So EOL implies that no one should ever be able to launch a VM for it? > Makes no sense to me. It's no longer receiving updates, so that does actually make sense. Can you describe the use case for an EOL release that might persuade us that we

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Hannes Schmidt
Hi Jan, So EOL implies that no one should ever be able to launch a VM for it? Makes no sense to me. -- Hannes On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Jan Kurik wrote: > Hi Hannes, > > Fedora-21 is now EOL. So, it makes complete sense to me these images > are already not available.

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora Cloud box idea

2016-02-03 Thread Gianluca Sforna
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 4:30 PM, Zoltan Hoppar wrote: > 2nd use case: At event a team wants to share, or cooperate together > without messing with the local network - instead using this box AP > witch gives you team tools, eg. etherpad, chat, logging, and anything > that can be

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Hannes Schmidt
I'm not asking for the images to be continually supported. Just not deleted. Maybe they can be placed into a separate "archive" AWS account? On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Matt Micene wrote: > The transparency argument does make sense, but yes then the "stock Fedora > AMI"

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Matt Micene
The transparency argument does make sense, but yes then the "stock Fedora AMI" is dependent on the projects update and lifecycle policy. On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Hannes Schmidt wrote: > We do take images of fully set-up VMs that are used in experiments. But > there is

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Garrett Holmstrom
On 2016-02-03 1:37, Joe Brockmeier wrote: On 02/03/2016 09:24 AM, Hannes Schmidt wrote: So EOL implies that no one should ever be able to launch a VM for it? Makes no sense to me. It's no longer receiving updates, so that does actually make sense. > Can you describe the use case for an EOL

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Matt Micene
> > big data genomics community where an experiment that can't be verified by > a 2nd party is a bad experiment. Like everywhere in science. VMs are a > great way to provide that reproducibility. Have you looked at AMI snapshots for reproducing experiment environments? Once the baseline

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Hannes Schmidt
Whether something makes sense is subjective. But as to your 2nd point. One word: Reproducibility. I am in the big data genomics community where an experiment that can't be verified by a 2nd party is a bad experiment. Like everywhere in science. VMs are a great way to provide that reproducibility.

Re: Deletion of AMIs in the EC2

2016-02-03 Thread Hannes Schmidt
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 02:19:19AM -, han...@ucsc.edu wrote: > > What is the motivation for the eager deletion of the official Fedora > > VM images (AMIs) from EC2? The image for 21 is already gone even > >