If I'm wrong about that point, I apologize for my overly hasty reading of the EC2 part of the script - I've not personally used it or the resulting AMIs. I also didn't think build-debian-cloud fully meets Lucas' original definition for (C), but honestly I'm not all that eager to continue what feels like petty quibbling about the status quo since we all want the same basic outcome here and nobody's acting in bad faith. Lucas's original wording was AIUI not intended as a final judgment but as a starting point.
It's probably more productive to refine the list of requirements Lucas has kindly recorded in the wiki, maybe culminating in a discussion/BoF at DC13, and to work to address outstanding issues. Any email pre-discussion should probably be under a more descriptive subject than "Adding cloud-init in the next Wheezy point release", too. :)
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 05:15:52PM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> Currently even the EC2 part of Amazon's build script pulls a specific
> version of euca2ools from Eucalyptus's github site during the build
> process. It also pulls a boto patch from Red Hat's bugzilla and applies it.
> While none of this bothers me from a freeness perspective, it doesn't meet
> Lucas's criterion (A) (about all software coming from Debian).
As I understood it, that point is about the software that's contained in
the images. Am I wrong in assuming that euca2ools is only used to build
the images and not shipped as part of it? I've only grepped around
Anders' script very quickly, and that seems to actually be the case, but
I certainly might have missed something.
I think this is an important distinction to make, if only to avoid
double standards wrt the regular Debian building toolchain.
Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . email@example.com . . . . o . . . o . o
Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o
Former Debian Project Leader . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o .
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »