On 2015-11-12 15:58:03, Thomas Goirand wrote: > As per the discussions during debconf, to be called "official", the > images have to be built: > - directly from an unmodified stable > - with reproducibility on any Debian computer (ie: no need for any > external infrastructure access) I don't think we reached any consensus in relation to the last point but I'm not going to argue about it right now. What I'd like to point out is that I don't think that right now it's possible to build images for all cloud providers outside their infrastructure. snip > Best would also be if the images could be built together with the rest > of the debian-cd infrastructure. +1 but this need more work on our (cloud team) side On 2015-11-12 16:01:50, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Unfortunately, "driven by technological necessity", or the size of > changes, isn't a point of argumentation (see my previous mail). All of > the packages must be taken from stable, unchanged, and if some are taken > from backports, this must be explicit, and the image shouldn't be called > "stable Debian". Official, yes, but not stable (maybe stable + some > backports would be ok...). Official Debian Cloud Image for [put your cloud provider] or just simply Official Debian Cloud Image -- |_|0|_| | |_|_|0| "Heghlu'Meh QaQ jajVam" | |0|0|0| -------- kuLa --------- | gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x58C338B3 3DF1 A4DF C732 4688 38BC F121 6869 30DD 58C3 38B3
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature