Re: Removing Debian 7.0.0 AMIs from AWS EC2
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:50 AM, James Bromberger <james@rcpt.to> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello all,
>
> It was already scheduled, and marked on the wiki for some months, but I am
> going to remove the outdated 7.0.0 AMIs from being shared from the Debian
> account tomorrow, 18 December 2014, and delete them shortly after.
>
> My plan is to sort out the 7.3 release (now that -- as per previous email --
> we have cloud-init running quickly) as priority. So let's review what AMIs
> we have available now:
>
> * 6.0.7 - currently sitting there. Possibly we should update to 6.0.8, but I
> haven't looked at it yet.
> * 7.0.0 - already deprecated, and going to be removed tomorrow (marked as
> private, and then deleted shortly thereafter).
> * 7.1a - the last version that was pushed to the AWS Marketplace and deemed
> as "ready"
> * 7.2 - a testing release that included cloud-init, but never pushed to
> marketplace because of the slowness (now resolved in 7.3 build with correct
> cloud-init config)
> * 7.3 - now in testing, and hopefully this week we'll consider this
> "current"
>
>
>
> In short order after we consider 7.3 as "good", I will push this to AWS
> Marketplace, and then declare 7.1a and 7.2 as deprecated and schedule them
> for unsharing and then removal.
>
>
> Note that if you are running any instance(s) from these older AMIs that the
> instance(s) will continue to run unaffected. However, any Launch
> Configurations and CloudFormation templates that reference these AMIs should
> be updated.
>
> James
First, thanks for all your hard work cutting and managing these AMIs.
Second, my apologies for the very late reply, as I'm just now catching
up to old emails.
What is our policy here? (Do we have one?)
My view is that if at all possible, our eventual policy should be that
we don't retire AMIs, but just make old ones harder to find.
This would match expectations of EC2 users, particularly those who
make heavy use of automated provisioning.
I believe we're probably on the same page, and eventually planned to
make these AMIs more persistent, but might be refraining until they
had cloud-init and perhaps other essentials built in?
-Brian
Reply to: