Hi Lucas, I'm David, from the Google Compute team.
Looking at your list of requirements, I generally like them.
The main concern is that some features of Google Compute are available
only with the installation of additional software inside the VM, and
some software we put in our images simply make users' lives easier
(rudimentary accounts and ssh key management, for instance).
To be honest, if Debian wants to include this software in Debian in
some way, shape, or form, we'd be *VERY HAPPY*. The only "problem" we
see is that we iterate quite quickly (release once every month or
two), and it's unclear how to make that fit in the Debian release
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Lucas Nussbaum <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 24/04/13 at 01:50 -0700, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
>> [+David - please correct me if I get any details wrong in this email.]
>> Hi Lucas,
>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Lucas Nussbaum <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> > Right. Note, however, that this is not very different from HP shipping a
>> > server with "Debian" pre-installed. So ideally, we would have a policy
>> > that addresses both cases.
>> > Does it sound doable that the requester would provide a script or
>> > another complete description (e.g. Puppet/Chef) of the customizations
>> > made from a standard Debian installation (either using d-i or
>> > debootstrap)?
>> Let's try this out now. :) As you can tell from my other recent posts
>> here, Google would like to collaborate with Debian to provide official
>> Debian images in the Google Compute Engine cloud. Please let us know
>> if Debian is okay with us doing the plan I describe in this email as
>> an official Debian image, of course always open to feedback from
>> Debian and adjustments as appropriate. If the request needs to go
>> somewhere else, please redirect appropriately.
> First, Nothing below is a definitive answer, either positive or negative.
> As you know, we don't have clear guidelines/policies for that question.
> I'm trying to get a better understanding first, and I'm open to changing
> my mind. :)
> There are two different questions in your email, even if it's not
> explicitely stated: naming that image "Debian image", and naming that
> image "official Debian image".
> Given the amount of customization you describe, my current feeling is
> that naming that image "Debian image" should be approved, and even more
> after you switch to using a Debian-provided kernel.
> Now, "official Debian image". I don't think that for EC2, "official" has
> been explicitely defined. It could mean "generated and provided by
> Debian", "recognized by Debian as being 'pure'", but also "part of the
> list of default images on GCE" (that would be "official" from the GCE
> POV, not from the Debian POV).
> Could you clarify what you are aiming for?
> For "official Debian images", I think that the list of requirements
> should include at least:
> A) the image includes only software available in Debian
> B) the image generation process is controlled solely by Debian
> C) the image is generated using tools available in Debian, or maintained
> by Debian
> Based on that, I don't think that we can approve naming those images
> "official Debian images".
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org