Re: Please let's not talk about "clouds"
> But if the idea is that the user
> uses his own servers, please don't use the term "cloud" to describe
I think it's fine to use the world "cloud" if we explicitly tell that it
to IaaS (Infrastructure As A Service) in this case.
I can't remember what "Infrastructure As A Service" means, but it's
more specific than "cloud" -- so why not say that instead?
> These two activities are entirely separate.
Though for both of them, we need a Debian Cloud Image,
I don't see why. Can you explain?
Support for virtual servers requires an image, but there is no need to
call that image "a cloud image". You can call it "an image for Amazon
virtual servers", or whichever.
Using programs such as Eucalyptus or others does not require a special
image. They just need to be packages.
cloud-init installed and so on.
What is "cloud-init", what does it do?
And why does it have a name using the confusing word "cloud"?
I was even
more disappointed to see such "official" Debian images being available
only on these private companies cloud,
If we're talking about virtual servers for rent, please don't call
them "clouds". Using that term spreads confusion every time.
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call