Re: Publishing cloud image lifecycle documentation
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 08:36:51PM +0000, Marcin Kulsiz wrote:
> > A while ago, Martin Zobel-Helas proposed documenting the cloud image lifecycle.
> > The initial thread is at . Bastian and I discussed this at the team meeting
> > and agreed it'd be good to publish something. But it should be discussed with
> > more of the team.
> Are we considering wiki for this or some other media(s)? Maybe a note on Image
> Finder to describe images life cycle and how we see it?
I was thinking the wiki just because it's easy. But it doesn't matter
to me - maybe a page on cloud.d.o would be better? Either way, linking
from the image finder would be a good idea.
> > The (I think) easy question: do we all agree this is worth doing?
> > The harder question: assuming so, what should the policy say?
> IMO what the policy could/should describe are:
> * What is the cadence and in what circumstances new images are going to be
> * Where and how updates provided by images should be documented.
Agreed on the first.
Not sure I understand the second. Do you mean that we should document
changes inside of the images between rebuilds?
> Possibly other things I've missed.
> > zobel's email includes an example proposal. He didn't mean to defend the
> > details, but it's worth considering as a starting point. Roughly, it says that
> > stable images will be:
> > 1. provided through the usual download & cloud-appropriate channels
> > 2. announced at release via firstname.lastname@example.org
> > 3. rebuilt either in the event of a significant security update or ~8weeks.
> > 4. supported though the end of stable security support
> > 5. announced at end of security support via email@example.com
> > 6. be removed 180 days after EoS announcement
> > 7. cloud providers will announce the removal via their preferred means 10 days
> > before the removal
> > My thoughts:
> > - #1-5 sound good. I don't think we all agree on periodic rebuilds when
> > there's no security update, but that seems okay to leave out.
> Looks good to me.
> Re.2 I was considering option of doing the same through the firstname.lastname@example.org
Nice idea, probably makes sense to notify both.
> Re.3 Probably doing it at the point release as well would also make sense if
> not purely from technical PoV it would give better visibility to the project
> when new images are available and hopefully would educate ppl where to look for
> new images in the future and how to track them.
Good call, and I think that's happening regularly anyhow.