[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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 [1].  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
>   released.
> * 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 debian-cloud-announce@lists.d.o
> > 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 debian-cloud-announce@lists.d.o
> > 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 debian-announce@lists.d.o

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.


Reply to: