On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 10:04:33AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >> I object because, at the 2018 Debian Cloud Sprint, we collectively
> >> decided that we were not offering Debian LTS Cloud Images. Are we
> >> changing our decision? I'd like to see collective decision making, not
> >> one-offs
On 2018-10-23 12:34:59, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> A lifecycle guideline COULD look like this:
I think that what you wrote makes sense. Aligning life cycle of the cloud images
with main line Debian should be clear and plainly stated.
--
|_|0|_|
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 11:51:26AM +0100, David Osborne wrote:
>Thank you... so the amis themselves should remain indefinitely?
I'd expect "release" AMIs to remain indefinitely, yes. There's strong
precident for this within AWS in general; it's part of the pledge to not
break users. For
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018, 6:17 AM Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> David,
>
> Also from a user’s perspective i would like to hear your feedback on the
> mail I wrote earlier today to the cloud list... Be aware that none of the
> timeline in this mail is written into stone yet. It is just a proposal.
>
>
David,
Also from a user’s perspective i would like to hear your feedback on the mail I
wrote earlier today to the cloud list... Be aware that none of the timeline in
this mail is written into stone yet. It is just a proposal.
Best regards,
Martin
> Am 23.10.2018 um 13:14 schrieb Martin
Hi David,
My understanding is that removing the images from the vendors market places is
to make the images less easy discoverable and to discourage users from spinning
new instances from an old image type. I don’t know the exact details for AWS
but my guess is those AMI IDs will NOT remain
Thank you... so the amis themselves should remain indefinitely?
--
David
On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 11:47, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
>
>
> From my understanding Noah only removed the links from the market place,
> but did not remove the images from the storage. This means by knowing the
> image
Hi David,
> Am 23.10.2018 um 12:09 schrieb David Osborne :
>
> We are among the population of users who are still using the Jessie AMIs and,
> until reading this, had planned to until 2020 due to LTS.
>
> We often have to rebuild instances on top of your Jessie AMIs since there are
> various
Hi,
in a different thread on this mailing list it has been brought to our
attention, that the team producing the images, the team providing LTS
support for Debian and OUR USERS have different expectations on the
lifecycle and the security support of our cloud images.
I need to admit, that at
We are among the population of users who are still using the Jessie AMIs
and, until reading this, had planned to until 2020 due to LTS.
We often have to rebuild instances on top of your Jessie AMIs since there
are various hurdles we still have to clear before Stretch will be an option
for our
On Sun, 21 Oct 2018, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> I'm sure a lot of it is a matter of perception, but the level of
> integration of LTS with the stable lifecycle does not seem as deep as
> someone familiar with Debian stable might expect it to be. For example,
> security announcements being published
On Mon, 22 Oct 2018, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> clear user demand for it, or we wouldn't be having this conversation. So
> I think we're better served by figuring out how to make LTS work (in
> cloud environments and more generally) than by trying to figure out how
> we can say no.
+1
> Is there
On 10/22/18 8:10 PM, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 05:52:15PM +, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
>> I object because, at the 2018 Debian Cloud Sprint, we collectively
>> decided that we were not offering Debian LTS Cloud Images. Are we
>> changing our decision? I'd like to see
13 matches
Mail list logo
