That seems a reasonable strategy, then we don't even need to manage our special repository to host them. I like it. I'll file an ACL ticket.
-david On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 5:27 AM, "Steffen Möller" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi David, > > For extra software Google aims at rendering publicly available for its cloud > environments: > if your image would allow to feature packages from backports.debian.org, > then this should > be a fairly safe bet. I personally would go as far as to say that anything > shipping with > unstable should be allowed to create your images, which may be where the > initial > setup of "rudimentary acconts" I would expect. > > Regards, > > Steffen > > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 24. April 2013 um 17:41 Uhr > Von: "David McWherter" <[email protected]> > An: "Lucas Nussbaum" <[email protected]> > Cc: "Jimmy Kaplowitz" <[email protected]>, debian-cloud > <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: Official Debian image request: Google Compute Engine (was: Re: > Please let's not talk about "clouds") > 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 > process. > > -david > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 5:54 AM, Lucas Nussbaum <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>> 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. >> >> Hi, >> >> 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". >> >> Lucas > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [email protected] > Archive: > http://lists.debian.org/CAG0yJ4JAdqE2tVbGyzipezJ4Lbw9V7=8y2zxm5_wwd9oeop...@mail.gmail.com > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAG0yJ4LcD9csqNrLG+kBWiA_f15VQAR-J00=XEPW8nsjt=g...@mail.gmail.com
